Nominations and CampaignsA Changing Game—Influence of

Media & Money on Politics

Phil Davison Campaign Speech

2012 Campaign Spending

Incumbency Advantage• Why isn’t equal public funding for campaigns likely?

– Who would need to support it?– Why would this hurt them?– Incumbency Advantage…

• What is it? – Tendency of the current officeholder to win re-election– Most important factor in determining outcome of Congressional elections

(Over 90% in House; over 75% in Senate)

• Why does this exist?– Money, 2:1 ratio v. challengers (Why are PACs more likely to support

incumbents?– Visibility– Constituent Service (pork barrel spending)– Gerrymandering

Nomination Process• Nomination

– What is it?• Deciding to Run

• Build a Base/Fund Raise• Develop Vague Platform

• Party-Centered• Issue Centered• Candidate Centered…

More common now…why?

• Clinch Party’s Nomination: Nat’l Conv.

– Goal: win majority of delegate votes from primary/caucuses & thus clinch party nomination

Selecting Delegates to the Party Convention

Caucus

• Closed meeting of like-minded people who go through discussions to select the candidate/s they will support in coming elections.

• Delegates Selected:– Precinct level …. County ….

District …

• Iowa Caucus

Primary• People vote directly for a

candidate; delegates then selected accordingly.– ↑people’s voice while ↓

control of party bosses (Prog.)

• Open, Closed, & Blanket– What’s the difference?– Why Closed?

• New Hampshire Primary

Which is more common? Why?

Significance of Iowa/New Hampshire?

Frontloading• Why are Iowa and New Hampshire so influential

in the presidential nomination process?– Why might some be critical of this?

• What is meant by Frontloading? – Why is this trend occurring?

• What is Super Tuesday? – Pros/Cons?

Primaries• Who votes in primaries?

– Impact on candidates?

• Criticisms– Low turnout

• Who votes?

– Primary Frontloading– Media Influence– Single Day– Growing role of $– Danger of Extremism– Solutions? Regional or National Primary?

Daily Show--Media and Primaries

Chappelle--Howard Dean Clip

Howard Dean: Iowa 2004

National Convention• Meet every 4 years to :

– Nominate the presidential and vice presidential candidates • How has this changed overtime?

– Bring party back together– Write the party’s platform.

• What’s the platform?• Delegates to convention chosen thru primaries/caucus

• How do delegates differ from typical voter?• Democrats: Proportional System Primaries (delegates allocated to each

candidate based roughly off % of pop. Vote they received)• Republicans: Prop. System + Winner-Take-All…depends when/where

• Superdelegates– Reserved spots @ the National Convention for party leaders. Not

committed to a candidate…can change up to day of convention– Once reserved for only democrats…now Republicans have small # of

superdelegates

Changing Campaigns• Increasing Impact of Media

– Bandwagon Effect/Polling, Sensationalism, Scorekeeper– Focus on trivial; Sound Bite-Journalism; Speculation

• Technology– Social Networks (Twitter, MySpace, Facebook)

• 2008: 500,000 Tweets in all 3 debates combined v. 2012: 10,000,000 Tweets during 1st debate

– Mass Impact on Funding– Free Media Exposure (News clips)– Advertising

• Growth of negative campaigning…why?

– Extremely high costs

Influence of Social Media Clip

Great Frontline Clip: Impact of Technology on Campaigning

Miscellaneous• Misc. Campaign Info

– Selective Perception…how does this influence the campaigns?

• Presidential v. Congressional Races– Pres. Campaigns = more expensive; more PAC donations– Pres. Campaigns = more competitive…why?– More vote in Pres. Elections…why?– Pres. Campaigns funded thru private/public sources

• Overall Voting– Priority list for making decision generally:

• Party, Candidate, Issue

– Retrospective Voting more infl. than prospective• Impact of the economy on voting?

2012 Campaign Spending…Is It Out of Control• 2012 Federal Election Spending

– $6 Billion spent in fed. Elections – $2 billion in Pres. Campaign– Spending doubled v. 2008 (most drastic in swing states)

• Colorado: A Case Study– From Sep. 13-19, Romney/Obama Camp. Spent $2 million in

Colorado alone• Over 1500 ads run, only 50 (3%) were positive ads

– September 2012: Colorado Springs• 2008: 519 ads aired• 2012: 1445 ads aired

Rise of Big Money

• How did we get to the point where money is now deluging our political elections?

• Lets go back in time…

Tom Emmer's Controversial Ad

Federal Election Reform Act• Impact of Watergate• Provisions

– Federal Election Campaign Act (1974)• Goal: Limit influence/role of $ in federal campaigns• Create FEC to monitor and enforce campaign finance laws• Provided partial public funding for presidential primary candidates

(Matching Funds)• Provided full public financing for major party candidates in the

general presidential elections • Placed limits on individual and corporate contributions directly to

presidential candidates

• Buckley v. Valeo (1976)

McCain-Feingold Act/Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act

• Provisions: – Banned Soft Money in fed. campaigns

• Soft Money: $ raised outside the limits and prohibitions of fed. Camp. Finance law…

– Unregulated $ funneled to political parties for party-building expenses like voter registration; distr. of campaign material; generic party ads, & “issue” ads

– How is this different than Hard Money?

– Banned Corporate Electioneering Spending, 60 Days Prior to General Election

– Candidates must take ownership for their ads– $ people can legally give to candid. Rise w/ inflation– Led to formation of 527 Groups …outside of camp. laws

527 Groups & 501(c)(4)s• 527 Groups

– Created to influence the political process – Not subject to contribution restrictions

b/c they don’t "expressly advocate" for the election or defeat of a candidate or party

• 501 (c)(4)s– Non-profit org… “issue” groups– Goal: “promote social welfare”– Not required to disclose donors

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth Ad

MoveOn.org McCain Ad

Political Action Committees (PACs)• PACs

– Groups formed by business, labor, or other interest groups; sole purpose raise money/make contributions to help elect a political candidate whom they support or help defeat a candidate

• Over ½ are sponsored by corporations and business groups

• Candidates Need $...PACs want access to politicians– Recipe for Corruption…– PACs generally support incumbent House members…why?

• How do they decide which one’s to support?

– PAC contributions to individual candidates had been limited to $5,000…then

came Citizens United…• How Independent are they?

Colbert Clip: Elliot Ackerman

Colbert Super Pac--Ham Rove

Colbert Clip: PAC Racist Ad

Colbert Clip--What is a PAC

Colbert Clip: Super PACs & Citizens United

Daily Show: Super PAC Coordination

Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee (2010)

• Basis for the decision (5-4)– Said Corporations are people… people have right to free speech…$ is a form

of speech… thus amount of money corp. spend on campaigns can’t be limited as long as they do it “independently”/“don’t coordinate” w/ a candidate or campaign

• Majority Opinion– "Political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment,

and the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not give money directly to campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through other means, including ads.“

– Essentially, the justices cemented an already-existing distinction between donations to candidates and parties — which can be capped by law — and money spent independently by outside entities (individuals, nonprofits, unions, and corporations), which can't be capped, according to the Court.

Judicial Activism: Overturning Precedent

• Prior Precedents: Decades--Supreme Court viewed spending on elections as a form of free speech (Buckley v. Valeo)– But Sup. Ct. also argued restrictions on such spending were acceptable because the

government has an interest in preventing corruption/ appearance of corruption; thus, limits of how much money any one donor could give to any one politician's campaign were allowed to stand

– Justices argued, big payoffs from a donor to a politician could be, or look, corrupt.

• Overturning Precedent?: Citizens United majority holds that as long as a huge donation isn't given directly to the politician or party, but is merely spent independently on the politician's or party's behalf, there's no danger of corruption serious enough to justify restricting that exercise of speech. – "Independent expenditures," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority, "do

not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption."

Dissenting Arguments• (1) corporations could threaten elected officials with

negative advertising to gain unprecedented leverage• (2) the public's faith in the electoral process is

adversely affected by corporate independent expenditures

• (3) qualities unique to corporations give them an unfair advantage in the political process,

• (4) corporations can raise vast sums of money that few individuals can match, unfairly influencing elections

Impact of Citizens United• Creation of Super PACs:

– AKA: "independent expenditure-only committees." – Outside groups can accept unlimited contributions from individuals and

corporations, and use them for electioneering purposes…– As long as they don’t give any money directly to candidates– Have to disclose their donors to the FEC

– Some Super PACs are founded specifically to back one particular candidate.

• Mitt Romney, Pres. Obama

– Other Examples• Karl Rove: American Crossroads Backs Republicans• Tom Steyer: NextGen Climate Action backs environmentalist Democrats. • Koch Brothers: Freedom Partners Action Fund backs Republicans. • Mayor Bloomberg Independence USA: supports moderates.

Impact of Citizens United

Dark Money• Rise of Dark Money

– Surge in spending from nonprofits that don't have to disclose their donors

– Don't have to report ads harshly criticizing candidates so long as • a) the ads run 60 days or more before an election, and • b) the ads don't explicitly advocate a vote for or against the politician.

– These “issue advocacy” groups registered under a part of the tax code for • "social welfare“—501 (c) 4• "business league" –501 (c) 6

– Examples • Karl Rove: Crossroads GPS• Koch Brothers: Americans for Prosperity

Impact of Dark Money

Impact of Citizens United

Impact of Citizens United

• Campaign Finance Laws Obsolete?– 2015-2016 Cycle:

• Candidates for federal office are only permitted to accept up to $2,700 from any individual donor

• $5,000 from any PAC per primary or general election.

– Democratic National Committee or the National Republican Congressional Committee can each only raise $33,400 from any one individual each year.

– Outside organizations like Koch Bros. can raise unlimited funds to spend on their own polling, data collection, outreach, and voter turnout operations.

McCutcheon v. FEC• Pre April 2014:

– Individual could hand out up to $2,600 to different candidates for federal office; once gave out $48,600 have to stop (per election cycle)

– Individual limited to $70,800 to federal PACs and political party committees (per election cycle)

• Campaign finance law capped the amount that could be given to federal candidates by any one person in each election cycle.

• Shaun McCutcheon files suit…claims cap is limit on free speech

McCutcheon v. FEC• Majority Opinion

– Struck down all those caps. – "The Government may no more restrict how many candidates or causes a donor

may support than it may tell a newspaper how many candidates it may endorse”—John Roberts

– Roberts continued, limitations on campaign spending must "target what we have called 'quid pro quo' corruption or its appearance … a direct exchange of an official act for money." In other words, little short of a direct bribe really counts.

– The restrictions on how much could be given to any one candidate still remained.

– But, Roberts argued, "If there is no corruption concern in giving nine candidates up to $5,200 each, it is difficult to understand how a tenth candidate can be regarded as corruptible if given $1,801, and all others corruptible if given a dime."

McCutcheon v. FEC

• Dissenting Opinion– Restrictions on campaign finance spending

actually strengthen the First Amendment, by preventing ordinary people's voices from being drowned out.

– "Where enough money calls the tune, the general public will not be heard," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in his dissent.

What Limits Still Exist• Which campaign finance laws remained after McCutcheon?• Here are some limitations on campaign spending and finance that still existed at the time of the 2014 ruling:• The disclosure system: Candidates, PACs, party committees, and Super PACs must still disclose all of their donors

and their spending to the FEC, which then makes that information public. Any other group that runs an ad mentioning a federal candidate had to report it to the FEC if it (1) was aired within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election, or (2) if the ad specifically advocated a vote for or against the candidate. In the Citizens United ruling, Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion specifically affirmed disclosure requirements as constitutional. Chief Justice John Roberts reaffirmed that in the McCutcheon ruling. Further disclosure rules are also permissible, but, as of 2014, seemed to have no prospect of passing Congress, being repeatedly blocked by Republican filibusters.

• The limits on campaign donations: Candidates were only permitted to accept up to $2,600 from each individual, and $5,000 from each PAC, for each election they faced. Primary and general elections were counted separately, so candidates could raise $5,200 per person per full election. PACs could only raise $5,000 from each individual per calendar year.

• The ban on corporate giving to candidates: Corporations and unions can't give directly to candidates or parties, though they can give unlimited amounts to Super PACs and outside groups. In the 2010 Citizens United ruling, the Supreme Court didn't specifically address whether this ban was constitutional, but did leave it in place.

• The soft money ban (cap on giving to parties): An infamous loophole in the campaign finance system allowed party committees to raise unlimited sums so long as the money was used for "party-building activity" — this was "soft money," and a new law banned the practice in 2002. The following year, a majority of the Supreme Court upheld the ban.

Citizens United Discussion Prompts• Should corporations be considered people, with the same rights as people for political purposes?

– What’s the difference between a person and a corporation? What’s their motivations/goals v. person’s

– Should money be considered speech?

– Does allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts of cash drown out the free speech rights of ordinary citizens?

• Can this lead to a handful of wealthy individuals secretly buying our democracy

– What about the hundreds or thousands of people who work for the corporation, support it, help it make money that don’t agree with how that corporation’s heads are trying to spend that money and what issues they’re supporting?

• Keep in mind what’s good for the corporation is not necessarily good for society or humanity

• Is it possible for SuperPACs/501 (c) 4s not to coordinate with candidates?

• Majority Opinion: “independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.” – Anthony Kennedy

– Why are these corporations, unions, and PACs donating such large sums of money?• Would they donate so much money if they weren’t getting something in return? • When does policy start benefitting special interests and hurt Americans?• What do government officials get in return?

• Should any organization that spends its money on elections, candidates or political issues be required to disclose their donors?

• Why might this lead to an increase in negative advertising?

• Why might the affects of Citizens United be felt most in state and local elections?

– Why is this significant? What level of government is closest to the people?

• Why are current changes to laws unlikely to be reversed?

Impact of Citizens United

Super PAC Donors as of Feb. 2012

Taking Back Democracy from Corporations