A recent report by the Center for Responsive
Politics suggests that this will be, by a relatively wide margin, the most expensive
overall election in U.S. history. According to CRP's analysis of Federal
Election Commission data, the 2012 election is expected to cost....wait for
it....$6 billion.
The biggest
and most obvious difference in this cycle, other than the country's growing
political polarization, is the amount of money being raised by outside and
supposedly independent organizations that, while they are not managed by a specific candidate, are in existence to help a chosen candidate in their election bid. These
groups are expected to spend more than $970 million.
Surprisingly,
spending on the presidential election is down from 2008, dropping by $200
million to $2.6 billion. This spending can be broken down into three
parts:
1.) $2
billion will be spent by the candidates and the major party committees.
2.) $528
million will be spent by outside organizations in their desperate attempts to
sway voters.
3.) $142
million was spent on the fun and games held at the RNC and the DNC conventions
held in August and September. Apparently, placards and balloons can
really add up!
Spending on
Congressional races is expected to rise modestly with total spending on House and
Senate races rising by only $100 million from 2010, hitting $1.82 billion.
House spending will rise by 3 percent to $1.1 billion and Senate spending
will actually fall by 7 percent to $743 million. The lion's share of
spending increases for Congressional seats is mainly among Republican
candidates because of the large numbers elected in 2010. Outside spending
on the 59 House contests that are deemed close or leaning to one party or the
other for one week alone in mid-October totalled $41 million.
All
Congressional candidates in total have raised more than $1.7 billion with
average incumbents raising $1.5 million compared to only $245,000 for their
challengers. Candidates that are funding their own campaigns have spent a total of more than $200 million of their own money to "win the prize".
In the Senate, incumbents raised an average of $11 million over their
six-year term compared to only $1.2 million for those who are challenging
them.
In both the
House and the Senate, Republican candidates have raised more than the Democrats
in this cycle, averaging $712,000 to $594,000. Overall, this means that
Republicans look set to raise 55 percent of all money raised by congressional
candidates, reaching a total of $1.1 billion.
Let's take a
look at outside spending. Spending by outside groups has grown from a
paltry $19 million per week in early September to a frantic pace of $70 million
per week in the week of October 21. American Crossroads and its non-profit
counterpart, Crossroads GPS (Karl Rove's babies) together report spending more
than $158 million on this election. Mitt Romney's supporting Super PAC Restore our Future has spent nearly $125
million. President Obama's supporting Super PAC Priorities USA Action reports that it has
spent a total of $67 million.
Let's take a brief look at the sharp contrast in the approach taken to raising funds by the two presidential candidates. Thus far, President Obama's campaign has received donations from many,
many small donations which have totalled over $214 million out of a total of
$632 million as shown here:
In sharp
contrast, the Romney campaign, while raising far less, has
only raised $71 million out of a total of $385 million from small donors as
shown here:
While small
donors still play an important overall role in U.S. elections, it is the
changes to laws that allow individual donors to donate unlimited funds to outside
organizations, particularly nonprofits, that has greatly impacted fundraising during this election cycle. For example, while it took fewer than 40 donors to raise
the $200 million received by outside organizations, it took over 350,000 small
donors to raise the $71 million in small donations raised by the Romney
campaign.
The Supreme
Court's Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission has been a game-changer
for American politics. With the advent of powerful and politically biased outside
organizations, campaign fundraising has never been so opaque, nor has it been
so tempting for America's wealthy ruling class to use their money to buy both politicians and ultimately, policy. If, as it would appear, money is paramount in the American political process, then the cards are held by very, very few, very, very wealthy Americans.
At least there is some balance now to the unions which before Citizens United were the sole politically biased group allowed to spend millions on an election. Maybe this will teach us a lesson and we will outlaw them all.
ReplyDelete