nach oben

Erschienen in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

10. Campaign Finance and Its Impact in the 2016 Presidential Campaign

verfasst von : Cayce Myers

Erschienen in: The 2016 US Presidential Campaign

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This chapter explores the campaign finance issues in the 2016 presidential election. Because understanding campaign finance requires a grasp of federal election laws, this chapter provides a brief and understandable overview of campaign finance laws. Next, this chapter discusses the campaign expenditures and impact the hotly contested presidential primaries had for the general election campaign. This chapter provides a detailed analysis of the campaign fundraising and expenditures of the Clinton and Trump campaigns as well as joint fundraising committees and super-political action committees, and concludes with analysis of why Donald Trump lost the money contest, but won the presidential election in 2016.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel From Benghazi to E-Mails: Two Sides of the Same Scandal

Nächstes Kapitel Explaining the Vote in the Election of 2016: The Remarkable Come from Behind Victory of Republican Candidate Donald Trump

Theodore Roosevelt: “Seventh Annual Message,” December 3, 1907. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29548.

Robert E. Mutch, Campaign Finance: What Everyone Needs to Know (Oxford University Press, 2016), 5. This is usually true for candidates who raise the most money. However, if a candidate uses his or her own money to self-finance there is a more mixed outcome. Mutch points out that Michael Bloomberg won the New York City’s mayor’s race using self-funding while Meg Whitman lost her largely self-funded bid for California’s Senate.

Alfred Chandler, Jr., The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1977), 145–203.

U.S. v. UAW-CIO, 352 U.S. 567 (1957). In this case Justice Felix Frankfurter detailed the history of campaign finance up until the 1950s. This history has been criticized for providing a false historical narrative of campaign finance laws that places the U.S. Congress in a positive light and ignores historical contextualization of campaign finance reform history. See Allison Hayward, “Revisiting the Fable of Reforms,” Harvard Journal on Legislation 45(2) (2008): 421–470.

U.S. v. UAW-CIO, 352 U.S. 567, 573 (1957).

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 61 (1976).

Newberry v. U.S., 256 U.S. 232 (1921). This case is interesting because of the fact that the case involved a dispute over Truman Newberry’s expenditures used in his 1918 bid to become the U.S. Senator from Michigan. Michigan law only allowed for a candidate to spend 25 percent of his future annual salary as a Senator during the Senate campaign. Newberry spent over $100,000 for his campaign to defeat the great American industrialist Henry Ford in the Republican primary.

This version of the FCPA was challenged as well and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in two cases Burroughs v. U.S., 290 U.S. 534 (1934) and U.S. v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299 (1941).

50 U.S.C. App.§§ 1501-1511(2010). This law was passed with a Congressional override of President Franklin Roosevelt’s veto.

Mutch, What is the Campaign Finance Problem?,14–15. According to Mutch the campaign finance issue in Watergate emerged because the Committee to Reelect the President did not disclose campaign finance information in compliance with the FECA. This issue was compounded by the fact that portions the presidential campaign in 1971 occurred at a time of transition between the FCPA and FECA.

“About the FEC,” Federal Election Commission, accessed December 20, 2016, http://www.fec.gov/about.shtml In the original FECA Congress, not the President of the United States, was tasked with appointing FEC Commissioners. However, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down this appointment scheme in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976).

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 58 (1976).

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 21 (1976).

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 61 (1976).

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 47 (1976).

The provision on election expenditure caps was created in part because by the 1970s election costs had increased. In their argument to the United States Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit the appellees noted that in the twenty-year period between 1952 and 1972 the cost of federal elections had increased 300 percent.

First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765 (1978).

First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765, 768 (1978) (citing Mass. Gen. Laws Ann., ch. 55 § 8 (West Supp. 1977)).

First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765, 777 (1978). It is important to note that the issue in this case did not involve corporate money used in a political campaign, but in a ballot initiative that concerning state income tax.

FEC v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, 479 U.S. 238 (1986).

FEC v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, 479 U.S. 238, 241 (1986). The U.S. Supreme Court noted that this category of corporation was rare, and that the criteria required to be a corporation like Massachusetts Citizens for Life meant very few corporate entities would fall into this special category.

Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, 494 U.S. 652 (1990).

Mutch, Campaign Finance: What Everyone Needs to Know, 104. Mutch notes that the reason this soft money was allowed was that at the time FECA applied to federal candidates. This permitted the more lax state fundraising to occur for state and local offices.

Bipartisan Campaign Act of 2002, Public Law 107–155.

Bipartisan Campaign Act of 2002, Public Law 107–155 §203. This provision was at issue in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, 551 U.S. 449 (2007). In that case the U.S. Supreme Court held that issue ads paid for by unions or corporation could not be banned by the BRCA.

McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93 (2003).

Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010).

SpeechNow.org v. FEC, 599 F.3d 686 (2010).

McCutcheon v. FEC, 134 S.Ct. 1434 (2014).

Cynthia L. Bauerly and Eric C. Hallstrom, “Square Pegs: The challenges For Existing Federal Campaign Finance Disclosure Laws in the Age of the Super PAC,” Legislation and Public Policy 15 (2012): 329–362, 356–361; Richard L. Hasen, Plutocrats United: Campaign Money, the Supreme Court, and the Distortion of American Elections (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2016); Marcus Cayce Myers and Ruthann Weaver Lariscy, “Corporate PR in a post-Citizens United world,” Journal of Communication Management 18(2) (2013): 146–157. 152–156; Ryan Penick, “The Anatomy of Debate about Campaign Finance,” The Journal of Politics, 78(4) (2016): 1184–1195), 1184–1189.

David Karol, “Forcing Their Hands?: Campaign Finance Law, Retirement Announcements and the Rise of the Permanent Campaign in U.S. Senate Elections,” Congress & the Presidency 42 (2015): 79–94, 91–92.

Brittany Bramlett, James Gimpel, and Frances E. Lee, “The Political Ecology of Opinion in Big-Donor Neighborhoods, Political Behavior 33(4) (2011): 565–600, 589–591; Raymond J. La Raja and David L. Wiltse, ”Don’t Blame Donors for Ideological Polarization of Political Parties: Ideological Change and Stability Among Political Contributors, 1972–2008, American Politics Research 40(3) (2012): 501–530, 519–523.

Penick, “The Anatomy of Debate about Campaign Finance,” 1184.

Penick, “The Anatomy of Debate about Campaign Finance,” 1186, 1187, 1188.

Breanne Gilpatrick, “Removing Corporate Campaign finance Restrictions in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 130 S.Ct. 876 (2010), Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 34 (Winter 2011): 405–420, 417. Gilpatrick notes that the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roberts has found other campaign finance laws unconstitutional such as in Davis v. FEC, 554 U.S. 724 (2008). In Davis v. FEC the U.S. Supreme Court held that certain provision in the McCain-Feingold Act, commonly referred to as the “Millionaire’s Amendment” was unconstitutional.

Hasen, Plutocrats United, 41.

Raymond J. La Raja and Brian F. Schaffner, “The effects of campaign finance spending bans on electoral outcomes: Evidence from the states about the potential impact of Citizens United v. FEC,” Electoral Studies 33 (2014): 102–114, 110. The authors make note that this study looks at success through the lens of incumbency and election of Republican candidates.

Mutch, Campaign Finance, 87–88.

Hasen, Plutocrats United, 37–59

Bauerly and Hallstrom, “Square Pegs,” 356–361.

Gregory Krieg, “Best of ‘State of the Union’: Trump, Clinton, and Sanders,” cnn.com, January 17, 2016, http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/17/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-donald-trump-sotu/.

Bradford Richardson, “Trump open to campaign finance reform,” The Hill, January 17, 2016, http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/266189-trump-open-to-campaign-finance-reform.

Kenneth P. Vogel & Isaac Arnsdorf, “Trump rewrites campaign cash rules,” POLITICO, February 21, 2016, http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/super-pac-fec-campaign-spending-2016-219579.

Erik Sherman, “Donald Trump Cranked Up Fundraising in June, Forgave $47 million,” Fortune, July 21, 2016, http://fortune.com/2016/07/21/donald-trump-fec-fundraising/.

Presidential Candidates Debates: “Democratic Candidate’s Debate in Las Vegas, Nevada,” October 13, 2015, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=110903.

This rejection of super-PACs by Sanders is debatable. See Michelle Ye Hee Lee, “Sanders’s claim that he ‘does not have a super-PAC,’” The Washington Post, February 11, 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/11/sanderss-claim-that-he-does-not-have-a-super-pac/?utm_term=.09762dc8cfff.

Bernie Sanders: “Remarks in Concord Following the New Hampshire Primary,” February 9, 2016. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=117511.

“Report Summaries Bernie 2016,” U.S. Federal Election Commission, April 2, 2017, http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandidateCommitteeDetail.do?candidateCommitteeId=P60007168&tabIndex=1.

Bernie Sanders: “Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,” July 25, 2016. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=118045.

Donald J. Trump: “Address Accepting the Presidential Nomination at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio,” July 21, 2016. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=117935.

Hillary Clinton: “Address Accepting the Presidential Nomination at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,” July 28, 2016. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=118051.

The federal matching fund provision is part of the FECA. However, since 2012 no presidential nominee of a major party has accepted the funds. Some view the acceptance of matching funds a severe limitation on fundraising.

“Face the Nation transcript August 23, 2015: Trump, Christie & Cruz,” last modified on August 23, 2016. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-transcripts-august-23-2015-trump-christie-cruz/.

Presidential Candidates Debates: “Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri,” October 9, 2016. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=119038.

Ibid.

“Two Year Summary Hillary for America,” U.S. Federal Election Commission, accessed December 27, 2016, http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandidateCommitteeDetail.do?candidateCommitteeId=P00003392&tabIndex=1; “Two Year Summary Donald J. Trump For President Inc.,” U.S. Federal Election Commission, accessed December 27, 2016, http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandidateCommitteeDetail.do?candidateCommitteeId=P80001571&tabIndex=1 See note 46 for more on Trump’s campaign loan forgiveness.

“Financial Summary Democratic Services Corp./Dem. Nat’l Committee,” U.S. Federal Election Commission, accessed April 2, 2017, http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandidateCommitteeDetail.do?candidateCommitteeId=C00010603&tabIndex=1; “Financial Summary Republican National Committee,” U.S. Federal Election Commission, accessed April 2, 2017, http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandidateCommitteeDetail.do?candidateCommitteeId=C00003418&tabIndex=1 These totals are based on the number of Total Receipts.

Donald J. Trump: “Press Release—Donald J. Trump Calls on All Presidential Candidates to Return Dark Money Sent to Super PAC’s,” October 23, 2015. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=113863.

Titel: Campaign Finance and Its Impact in the 2016 Presidential Campaign
verfasst von: Cayce Myers
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: The 2016 US Presidential Campaign
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52598-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-52599-0

Copyright-Jahr: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52599-0_10