Who Owns Democracy?

Money & Politics: Who Owns Democracy?
By Michael deCourcy Hinds
Prepared by Public Agenda

Introduction: Money & Politics

The majority of Americans tell poll takers that money is corrupting politics, undermining elections, and shutting citizens out of our democratic system. What's wrong? What can be done? As with other NIF issue books, this one provides an overview of the issue and, to promote public deliberation, outlines several perspectives, or choices. Each choice speaks for one set of American priorities and views and, drawing ideas from across the political spectrum, advocates a unique and consistent approach to the issue. Some elements of the choices are readily mixed, but not others, as each choice has its own priorities and agenda.

Choice 1: Reform the Campaign Fundraising System

Democracy cannot thrive unless political candidates have enough money to inform citizens about their competing ideas and qualifications. The problem is that more than 90 percent of political contributions come from wealthy contributors and special interests, which often have matters pending before government. As a result, many elections are elitist fundraising competitions and the democratic principle of "one person, one vote" is corrupted into "one donor, much influence." In this view, the nation must regain control of elections by choosing from a menu of reform options that include publicly funded campaigns and regulations that prevent special interests from subverting the public interest. The nation is moving in this direction, but it's been a very half-hearted effort lacking a real commitment to clean up politics. It's time to get serious about making real reforms.

Choice 2: Rein In Lobbyists and Politicians

Campaign finance reforms will only disappoint and disillusion citizens because they focus narrowly on political campaign contributions, which are dwarfed by the billions annually spent on lobbying politicians. So reforms that curb special interests' spending on political campaigns merely redirect the flow of money in politics, sending it deeper underground. In this view, the way to reduce money's corrupting influence is by exerting much more control over the way politicians and bureaucrats at every level of government interact with special interest lobbies. In addition to new restrictions on lobbying, there also needs to be more restrictions on politicians. Ballot measures, which permit voters in some states to enact or repeal laws when politicians ignore the public will, should be permitted in all states and at the federal level. Laws should also make it easier for voters to recall elected officials who aren't serving the public interest.

Choice 3: Publicize All Political Donations, Don't Regulate Them

Our representative system of democracy has withstood the test of time and, until the 1970s, worked well without much regulation of campaign finance. Then the Watergate scandal precipitated a rush to regulate political contributions, restricting everyone's freedom. But freedom resists regulation, and the reform effort backfired, systematically distorting our democratic system and causing more damage than the occasional bribery scandal ever did. Elections are now tipped towards incumbents, celebrities, and the rich. Most challengers can not raise enough money to compete. Political gridlock is epidemic. To revive democracy, we need to free candidates and advocates to raise the money they need for competitive campaigns that draw public attention to important issues and decisions. A new requirement for fuller and faster disclosure of all political donations is the best way to deter corruption and head off conflicts of interest.

Summary: What Kind of Democracy?

Summary: Comparing the Choices