Written by Tianqi (George) Sun
The presidential election of 2024 is coming up. No matter which political party people associate with, there is one undeniable truth: running for president costs billions of dollars. With these contributions, challenges arise, and significant debates around the influence of money on elections have arisen. Campaign financing includes terms such as “dark money,” “soft money,” and “hard money” to categorize the sources and regulations around these funds.
Dark money refers to the money donated by wealthy individuals to influence the election and public policy. These funds are usually undisclosed because they are passed through from a non-profit organization (FEC.gov.). The politicians are only required to display the name of the non-profit organization instead of the specific donations. Soft money refers to the donation to a specific political party rather than a specific candidate; this means it is outside of the Federal Election Commission (FEC limitations). These funds are highly unregulated and are known as “non federal” contributions. In comparison, hard money represents the funds that came only from an individual or a political action committee. This money is highly regulated and monitored by the FEC and is subject to federal limits (FEC.gov.). These different types of money have created trouble for the FEC to regulate, and over the years, different legislations have been put in place for regulation, but some also have been changed. As more and more funds are required to run for a presidential election, the power of money in politics has been a topic that is more important than ever for people to discuss.
The presidential election fund has risen significantly over the past decades. In the 2022 election, a total of 16.7 billion dollars was spent on campaigning from the candidates (Giorno). Some people have concerns about the influence of the donation money. It is widely believed that companies and people who donate to the presidential campaign will have an easier time getting contracts from the federal government. Also, the candidate will make more time and meetings with those who have donated and might potentially pass legislatures and policies to help the individual who has donated. For instance, George Soros donated 140 million dollars to political causes in 2021 just before midterm elections, making him the lead donor of the midterm election (Schwartzb).
However, some argue that the spending and funding does not correlate with the victory of the candidate. Funding does play a larger role running for state-level and other sub-level elections, but less so for presidential elections. Though funding is important, it is only for publicity and competitiveness; in the end, the candidates themselves need to carry out their message to the public in order to secure an electoral victory.
To go into more regulations about the presidential election, people call for regulations to be put on large election donors to prevent corruption and increase trust in the government. The government needs to be an entity that makes economic decisions that are beneficial to the country and the people instead of profiting specific individuals. Over time since the 20th century, legislation has been put in place to combat this distrust and regulate the election. The Tillman Act of 1907, which prohibited corporate contributions to federal candidates, and the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1971, amended post-Watergate to establish a comprehensive system of regulation and enforcement, including public financing of presidential campaigns and the creation of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) (The Free Speech Center).
There has also been a counteractive force to the regulation. The supreme court’s decision in Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and subsequent rulings like Citizens United v. FEC have significantly impacted campaign finance laws by striking down spending limits as unconstitutional violations of free speech, thereby removing some limits on campaign expenditures unless candidates accept public financing (Buckley).
To further build a fair election environment, and as time progresses, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), also known as the McCain-Feingold bill, aimed to address some of these issues by eliminating soft money donations to national party committees and setting limits on “electioneering communications (Legal Information Institute).” However, its effectiveness has been mixed, with continued debates over the influence of money in politics and calls for further reforms.
The influence of money on the election has been tremendous. There is a persistent tension between free speech and political contributions. The FEC’s role in enforcing federal campaign finance laws and providing transparency is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the presidential campaign finance process. As time progresses, the regulations will most likely adjust to ensure a more comprehensive system for election to make the process as transparent as possible.
References
Buckley v. Valeo. FEC.gov. (n.d.-a). https://www.fec.gov/legal-resources/court-cases/buckley-v-valeo/
Giorno, T. (2022, November 21). Total cost of 2022 state and federal elections projected to exceed $16.7 billion. OpenSecrets News. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/11/total-cost-of-2022-state-and-federal-elections-projected-to-exceed-16-7-billion/
Introduction to campaign finance and Elections. FEC.gov. (n.d.-b). https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/#:~:text=The%20Federal%20Election%20Commission%20(FEC,Presidency%20and%20the%20Vice%20Presidency.
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Bipartisan campaign reform act of 2002. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/bipartisan_campaign_reform_act_of_2002
Public funding of presidential elections. FEC.gov. (n.d.-c). https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/understanding-ways-support-federal-candidates/presidential-elections/public-funding-presidential-elections/
Schwartzb. (2023, January 5). Nonprofit financed by billionaire George Soros quietly donated $140 million to political causes in 2021. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/04/nonprofit-financed-by-billionaire-george-soros-donated-140-million-to-political-groups-in-2021.html#:~:text=Soros%2C%20who%20personally%20donated%20%24170,copy%20of%20its%202021%20tax
Tillman Act of 1907 (1907). The Free Speech Center. (2024, February 19). https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/tillman-act-of-1907/