Money influences voters in recent election

Who decided the recent elections: money or the people?

Money has become even more influential in recent elections. Political fundraising has become a no-holds-barred kind of world. The U.S. Supreme Court Citizens United ruling opened the floodgates when money became equated with speech. Making corporate contributions, in a sense, unlimited. Which also means the common person can do the same, of course, in a much smaller scale. However, there is no way an individual can contribute to the same scale a corporation can. Which begs the question: Does courting the common person matter anymore?

According to the Federal Election Committee (FEC), the top super-PACs are primarily funded by the same 200 individuals or corporations. We live in a country of 350 million people and our elections are mostly being funded by the same 200 people and corporations. Political ads now receive a large portion of their funding from those on the outside looking in.

The corporate political contributions has had a tremendous impact on elections, especially in Oregon’s debate over Measure 92, a measure that would have required the labeling of any food that contains genetically modified foods. According to the Oregonian newspaper, $5.7 million was spent to oppose the measure while $3.3 million was spent in an effort to pass it.

A large portion contributed to take down the measure came from Monsanto, a multinational agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation, which contributed $1.5 million out of the total $5.7 million. Those “small town Oregon farmers” seen in the attack ads were paid for by one of the largest food corporations based in Missouri, not Oregon. According to the Oregonian newspaper, 99.99 percent of all opposition contributions came from out-of-state corporations. In the end, an Oregon ballot initiative was not funded by Oregonians. Out-of-state funding decided an election.

Studies have provided evidence that big spending influences elections. A study conducted by Michael Franz, a professor of political science showed that when 1,000 more ads are broadcasted for a particular side they see an increases of 0.5% in the polls for their side. The opposition on Measure 92 beat the affirmative by 0.5 percent.

Campaign financing in politics has become a whole new animal since the Citizens United ruling in 2010. This past midterm election has gone down as the most expensive midterm in U.S. history, which according to the Center for Responsive Politics, cost $3.72 billion. We, the common people, don’t have as much to “say” as corporations do. Political spending has been growing every year, drowning out the voice of the common people. But one thing seems to be more true than ever — Money talks.

#politics #money #Issue11415