Time is steadily moving towards the mid-term elections in November - an opportunity that both parties have their eyes fixed on as it could dramatically alter the balance of power in Congress and significantly affect the next two years of legislation.
We
are often told that statistically only 50% of believers are registered
to vote and that only half of those registered actually follow through
with a vote on election day. If we as the body of Christ have not taken
hold of even the most basic opportunity to influence the governing of
our nation, it is safe to assume we don’t fully understand many aspects
of the political process as a whole. This is not entirely our fault;
there is no question that the American political system has become
overly complex.
As
reformers, however, we do want to be good stewards of our nation and
understand as much as we can. Below is a practical look at the
significant role money plays in the election process. Some might
consider moving beyond prayer to practically support a candidate,
special interest group, agenda, etc. It is important to be knowledgeable
of how the system works and how to be most effective. One of our state
leaders, Craig Bensen, has put together a concise, easy to understand
overview to help us understand some of the terms and issues we will be
hearing over the next few months.
In addition, we encourage you to get informed on the races in your state as well as the top issues to be aware of. Please click here to read an article that includes your state's voter's guide that includes all this information!
For the nation,
Mike and Cindy Jacobs
In addition, we encourage you to get informed on the races in your state as well as the top issues to be aware of. Please click here to read an article that includes your state's voter's guide that includes all this information!
For the nation,
Mike and Cindy Jacobs
Money in Politics
by Craig Bensen
by Craig Bensen
In
a campaign year we expect to hear some discussion of the campaign
fundraising process. Some of this discussion is related to the average
American 's astonishment as to the amount of
money that is involved in the process - nearly $5 billion in the Federal
elections of 2012; however, the bulk of the discussion relates to
issues of fairness, transparency and abuse of the process.
First,
let's limit ourselves to the financing of Federal campaigns and the
role of money in this arena. The 50 states have their own labyrinths of
campaign finance laws. If one has a grasp of the game at the Federal
level, the mechanics of most state laws will be understandable.
Second,
money is essential to modern American politics. In the movies, Mr.
Smith can go to Washington riding a populist dream and remain beholden
to no one but "the people". In reality, no candidate advances in a
contest for a Federal seat without learning to do math involving
millions of dollars or without understanding the calculus of values
attached to those dollars.
Third,
occasional efforts to "clean up" campaign fundraising by rewriting the
rules will continue to be fronts for one party attempting to
disadvantage the other party. Of course, Ralph Nader is above all this
-- he's willing to disadvantage both major parties.
Defining Terms
Hard Money - 'federal money" or campaign expenditures falling under the purview of the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
Federal
law regulates how much individuals and organizations may contribute to
political campaigns, political parties, or other organizations watched
by the FEC. Corporations and unions may not donate money directly to
candidates or national party committees.
During
any one campaign cycle an individual may give up to $2,600 to any
individual candidate or up to $30,800 to a national party committee
(these amounts are indexed to inflation).
National Party Committees and most PACs may contribute up to $5000 per cycle to any one candidate.
The
intention of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1971 was to
"limit the influence" of "big money" in politics. The history of the
next 33 years suggests that the attempt failed.
Big Money - the contributions from rich folk in the other party.
Soft Money - "non-federal money" or campaign expenditures not falling under the purview of the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
Prior
to the passage of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA,
McCain–Feingold Act), Congress could not restrict the total amount of
"independent expenditures" made by a political party without
coordination with a candidate. This allowed large amounts of soft money
to be used for "legislative advocacy media advertisements" as long as
they did not advocate for a federal candidate. Thus political parties
bypassed FEC oversight and the limitations imposed by the Federal
Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1971.
Illegal Money -
Disallowed are any direct campaign contributions from foreign
individuals, corporations or governments, as well as any money
from Federal Government Contractors, Corporations and
Unions, Contributions in the Name of Another (I give you $$$ and you
make the contribution) and any Excessive Contributions past legal
limits.
The Channels
Parties -
Primarily the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National
Committee. The rules apply to other National Party Committees -
Libertarian, Constitution, Green, etc. Since all the others together
rarely garner 5% of the monies, no attention is given them by anyone
outside of the FEC.
PACs -
A Federal Political Action Committee is a multi-candidate political
committee with more than 50 contributors which has been registered for
at least 6 months and has made contributions to 5 or more candidates for
federal office. Because of the $5000 contribution limit from any one
entity, PACs have multiplied. A labor union-favored candidate might well
receive $20,000 in $5,000 contributions from the Democratic National
Committee, the National Education Association's "connected PAC", the
National Education Association's "unconnected PAC" and the National
Education Association's "leadership PAC".
"Super PACS" -
An independent PAC may raise and spend unlimited amounts. Incorporated
as "independent-expenditure only committees”, they may not make
contributions to candidate campaigns or parties. They may independently
spend to influence an election.
Most
voters see the hand of Super PACs at work in the form of negative
campaign ads during election season. These ad campaigns often make
claims that no candidate would dare suggest about their opponent, but
since the ads come from an "independent source", the claims get made and
the "out of state" Super PAC is the one "responsible" for slinging the
mud.
The Citizens United case opened
the door to Super PACs when the US Supreme Court ruled that the
government may not prohibit unions and corporations from making
independent expenditure for political purposes. The progressive wing of
the Democratic Party and the Occupy Now folks have made "Citizens
United" a public issue with the rallying cry, "A corporation is not a
person,” but the parallel reminder that "a union is not a person" has
yet to fall from their lips.
501(c)4s -
While 501(c)3 groups like the NAACP, the National Rifle Association,
Planned Parenthood, the National Right To Life Committee and the Family
Research Council are barred from campaign involvement, their partner
501(c)4 entities may "educate" and "advocate" public policy positions
even during election season.
As
a spin-off benefit, the 501(c)4s are not required to disclose the names
of their donors whereas Super PACs must publicly list donors
contributing more that $200. This makes 501(c)4s the "weapon of choice"
in Federal elections.
During
the past election cycle, the two biggest groups together raised more
funds than all the Super PACs combined. The two groups were vehicles for
conservative influence: Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and the Koch brothers' Americans for Prosperity.
While
liberals consider this "conservative" ascendency as a sign of corrupt
politics, a more reasoned assessment sees the success of groups like
Crossroads as a healthy balance to the hefty influence of union funds
and activities on behalf of the Democrats.
Public Financing -
Often a neglected source of funding, checking a box on your IRS 1040
return credits $3 toward presidential elections.This is a bookkeeping
sleight of hand. The $3 contributions have never met the costs to the
General Fund. Most candidates since 1976 have accepted the funds.
A
review of how the funds are used - for the costs of the Democrat and
Republican national conventions as well as some costs of national
parties general election campaigns - reveals a Federal perk that has
little relation to better or cleaner elections. Over $200 million can be
expended in a presidential election cycle. Neither Obama or Romney
accepted any Federal funds in the 2012 election. Thus they were not
subject to restrictions on raising or expending private monies during
the election.
Some Simple Value Systems
Big Money is Bad - My rich folk have "good money”; the other party's rich folk have "big money".
Sometimes
"big money" is amazingly ineffective. This year one billionaire vowed
to spend $100 million of advancing a "green" agenda in the elections. By
the time the "professionals" in the Democrat Party finished "educating"
him, he ended up putting $1.4 million into Senate primary races where
his money had little effect.
The best way to use "big money" to influence politics is to buy a media outlet, not a politician...
Corporate Money is Bad -
To Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and the Occupy Now crowd, "Multi-National
Corporations" are evil, and all corporate contributions or expenditures
are "corrupting" the political process. Most companies would consider a
ban on corporate money to be a form of taxation without representation.
The Supreme Court considers corporate money to be constitutionally
protected free speech.
Union Money is Bad -
Not really "bad", just "specially privileged" and undemocratic. Do all
the members of the NEA or the AFL-CIO really approve of their dues being
used solely to advance the agenda of the Democrats?
Anonymous is Bad -
In theory, yes, we should know where the money is coming from. In
practice, we live in an age of "mean" politics. Where once the KKK might
come knocking on your door, now the homosexual activists target
individual donors, churches and businesses who vote, advocate or donate
"on the wrong side of history".
"Your Party Needs Your Contribution" -
No matter how clear the call is to donate so your party can "fix what's
broken in Washington" or to "prevent the barbarians" from taking over
the country, this is a sales pitch. You need to consider the quality of the product you are being offered.
Perhaps your $50 might do more to advance your values if given to an D.C. based advocacy group instead.
Ways To Move Forward
Let's
grant that wise public policy on this issue is not likely to come from
either the fox (the Executive branch) or the chickens in the coop
(Congress). So that leaves our current practice of lawsuits which force
the Judicial branch to set policy - not a good idea in the long run.
This leaves the "independent commission" as an option.
A "Campaign Finance Commission" (CFC) may be convened by the Speaker of the House according to these guidelines:
1) The CFC shall have a minimum of six members including -
a) the three youngest male members of Congress
b) the three youngest female members of Congress
c) the most recent former members of Congress who retired by honoring a "term limit" campaign pledge
d) three members of the majority party who are selected by the leader of the minority party
e) three members of the minority party who are selected by the leader of the majority party
2) The CFC shall be tasked with keeping campaign funding rules simple, fair and honest.
3) The CFC process shall consist of sequestering the Commission until a unanimous plan is produced.
4)
The CFC members will present their plan to the Congress and then do a
fifty state, Town Meeting Tour to present it face-to-face to the people.
As
we frequently hear on Capitol Hill, this may not be the best plan, it
may not be the final plan, but it is a plan that can help move the
discussion in the right direction.
Pray:
- Knowing it is God who sets up
and removes leaders, pray for the leaders God is raising up for our
nation to have all the funding and resources they need. (Romans 13:1)
- Pray for financial corruption and unholy alliances in our political system to be exposed. (Ephesians 5:11)
- Pray for a renewal of integrity and humility among our national leaders, that funds entrusted to individuals and political parties would be used for the good of the nation and not for selfish gain. (Proverbs 12:22)
