2 of 20

No

Write now Article Tools

If only campaign fund-raising was truly an indication of voter support? In today's IT-driven world, candidates who know how to leverage social networking sites have a tremendous advantage over their IT-challenged competitors as Barack Obama demonstrated during the 2008 presidential election campaign. In his case, it was fortunately an indication of significant voter support (as the final polls amply demonstrated), but consider the impact if a candidate who has less popular support learns to exploit the power of cyber integration like our current President is able to do.

Another anomaly of the fund-raising situation is the candidate who has strong support from well-funded corporate interests. This is especially acute in areas where the average income of the electorate is on the lower middle class scale. While the individual voters can show their support with small donations, corporate interests can really enrich the campaign coffers of the candidates they support. Lets look at a not-so-hypothetical example. In a somewhat depressed area of the country (which, for the protection of the innocent and guilty will remain unnamed) a large corporation wants to build a plant. While the plant will bring employment to the area, which is sorely in need of new jobs, as it is designed and intended, it will destroy the environment. Two candidates are contending for the county commissioner's job. One candidate is completely supportive of the company, while the second proposes some modification to the business plan that will protect the environment. The problem from the coporation's point of view is that his plan will cost more to implement and will cut into profit margins. The voters of this district see the merits of the second candidate's position and contribute to his campaign. The corporation, ever focused on the bottom line, throws its weight behind the first candidate. The result is a lopsided fund-raising effort, with the first candidate besting his opponent three to one in contributions. The funding advantage allows him more media exposure and he is able to saturate the district with negative ads that undercut his opponent and sway undecided voters.

It would probably come as no surprise to learn that the corporate-funded candidate won the election by a small margin of voters, despite the fact that most of the residents of the district actually supported the loser. Unfortunately, we live in a world of sound bites and a lack of reflection on the part of voters. Too often, ballots are cast on the basis of last minute information or subjective factors which can be influenced by the ability to access mass media. That ability is impacted by the funds a candidate is able to raise, and despite contribution limitations in the laws of most states as well as federal election statutes, people with deep pockets and agendas have found ways to ensure that one-man, one-vote is a slogan not a reality in American politics.

Learn more about this author, Charles Ray.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Is campaign fund-raising an indication of voter support??
We want to hear your view. Write now!