-
Have $500k to spare? Why not try to buy the Presidency?
17 Feb 2012 by John Fagan in Campaign Finance and Politics, Fordham University School of Law, Law School Marketing / 2 Comments
$181,000,000.
That’s how much money Super PACs (political action committees) have raised over the past two years alone.
$181,000,000.
Amassed and spent for political attack ads. I could pontificate at length about what this absurd amount of money could have provided our society, but instead I’m going to give you the next three lines to imagine how you would have spent it.
And we’re back. The most troublesome thing about this
speechmoney, aside from its sheer volume, is the source of the cash. About half of the $181,000,000 comes from just 200 uber wealthy donors. The bulk comes from just 37 people who each gave $500,000. Thanks to those generous – and no doubt magnanimous, no-strings attached – contributions, some of those 37 people have placed themselves squarely in line for a whole lot of White House M&M’s.This report comes on the heels of President Obama endorsing the use of a Super PAC to support his re-election campaign. That’s right, the record-shattering $745,000,000, which doubled Senator McCain’s ultimate haul, he managed to drum up for his successful Presidential bid in 2008 wasn’t going to do it this time around. Which makes me question if President Obama has ever heard of the bully pulpit.
This isn’t the only time President Obama has retreated on a campaign finance pledge. In 2008, he said
“I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests…. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election….If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”
He reneged on that promise and blew past McCain in fundraising and spending and *Spoiler Alert* he won – in a modern day landslide. Despite an apparent recent turnaround, it doesn’t seem like the President is taking any chances when it comes to re-election. Not with the Mitt’s charisma or Santorum’s electability awaiting him in the fall.
About the Author: John Fagan
2 Comments
Ted Compton
It’s funny how, when a candidate is behind, they claim to take the high road in order to level the playing field. But when ahead, they ignore the high road pleas in order to win on force.
What propelled Obama’s first fundraising success was his promise for a different kind of change. He doesn’t have that luxury this time around, although his competition does.
Of course, the one thing every candidate fails to inform their supporters, although all the winners inevitably prove, is that the saying “change is the only constant” does not hold true in Washington.
Some of Ron Paul’s (who is the largest voice of change in Washington) supporters should start asking the questions, “How” instead of “What.”
19 Feb 2012 08:02 am (@TCompton)
MargaretAnn Mancini
Once again you amaze me…. this was great!!!
23 Feb 2012 02:02 pm (@Twitter)
Leave a Comment