This past week my mother forwarded a link to an article published in The New York Times. She did not mention anything about the content of the article besides the fact that it was about the Koch Brothers funding political advertisements. I expected to read about the Koch brothers paying for advertisements in a gubernatorial election or a mayoral race in a large city. After all, these two brothers are notorious for lucratively funding conservative political action committees, and they were the second largest contributors to Gov. Scott Walker’s campaign for governor in 2010. To my surprise, this article had nothing to with the gubernatorial election in Virginia or the mayoral election in New York. Rather, this article was about city council elections in Coralville, Iowa. The article detailed how Americans for Prosperity, a political action committee largely funded by the Koch Brothers, had become involved in these races. In a town of approximately 20,000 people, the two Koch brothers, each valued at $36 billion, were trying to influence the election with their money. This was shocking to me. Typically, these elections are not highly contested and they normally go unpublicized. This changed with the Koch brothers. Outside help was being brought in to run candidate campaigns and candidates were being forced to change their platforms. One candidate had planned a campaign on smaller issues such as painting the water tower. However, after Americans for Prosperity came to town, everything changed. Central debates of the campaign were shifted toward issues that pertained to Koch Brothers’ business interests. To me, the Koch brothers’ goal was clear. As much as they tried to disguise their intentions, it was clear control was the end goal. They wished to control government and create policies favorable to their interests. Apparently, no election is too small to buy.
This influx of dollars into smaller races represents a terrible trend that has been occurring throughout the United States for decades now. This trend of money in elections has been prevalent in the United States for many years, and this is to be expected. However, in recent years, this trend has grown out of control. Money used to be important but not essential. If the candidate had money, that was great, but if they didn’t, it was not the end of the world. The candidate could make up this lack of money in other aspects of the campaign. Now this is not the case. Money is now necessary for candidates and elections are dominated by spending. Now if a candidate does not have money, it is almost impossible to overcome this obstacle. In the past presidential election, over $2.5 billion was spent. This is an absurd amount of money to be spent on a single race. Critics argue donors should be allowed to donate in any amount they desire and see fit. I say this is outrageous. No race should have this much money spent on it.
I believe the solution to this problem is a campaign-spending limit. There should be a maximum amount allowed to be spent on a campaign. This would significantly impact elections. Currently, corporations largely fund many elections. These corporations do not represent the values of the average American; they represent the values of the greedy, profit-driven heads of these corporations. As much as these corporate heads attempt to make it seem as if these values are what is best for America, they are not.
These corporate heads want what is best for their corporation’s bank account, and they care about little else. These policies are not beneficial for a majority of Americans, and the average American’s wallet is hurt because of them. By placing a cap on election spending, the control over elections is shifted. Money would no longer dominate elections, and the American public would have a much larger say in elections. Candidates could focus less on fundraising and more on issues important to the average American. While a cap on spending is unlikely because of the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) decision by the Supreme Court, it is what is best for America.
How do you feel about campaign spending? Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
