Political Reform Assessment - Essay Example

Political Reform Assessment (The Web of Campaign Finance) Politics and businesses operate in a unique blend of networking of stakes. While politics need businesses to finance their requirements for money, corporate houses require politicians for furthering their business interests. This is no trade secret and is practiced across the world with different sets of understandings and deals. In a nutshell the scenario could be summed up by quoting a statement of a prominent American politician, who once declared1 that "money is the mother's milk of politics." Political leaders are required to make laws for governing the state, keeping the interests of the common people in mind. They are supposed to uphold the ethics and principles of good governance. In principle, the politicians, being public figures, are supposed to lead exemplary lives, without being influenced by any vested interests. The corporate houses too are required to operate their businesses in such a way that the no harm is done to the society, to the environment and the polity of the nation/s. With the emergence of globalisation, the concepts like 'corporate governance' have emerged for managing the businesses more effectively. Media in general and electronics media in particular, too plays a very important role in telling the people about the values, ideas, opinions and culture of any political party and organisation. Therefore, now there is an exponential increase in the reliance on the broadcast media for political campaigns. This has proved to have a powerful role in making or breaking the chances of any political party. Opinion builders are entrusted with the task of spreading good words about the candidate (often this is termed as planting stories). In addition, candidates take up extensive tours to meet as many people as possible. All such exercises require good amount of money and hence the need for arranging funds. While it is true that businesses are supposed to work within the framework of rules and guidelines formulated by the political bosses, it is now an accepted fact that politics too cannot survive without a 'big' helping hand from businesses. But companies are placed in an unenviable position of being labeled as sympathizer to one particulars party or candidate if they support one at the cost of the other. Just in case the results are different, then there's a threat of retaliation. During earlier times, politicians used to get finances from some big companies, in a hush-hush manner so that their political affiliations are not divulged. This trend continued for quite a while, but gradually started resulted in arm-twisting tactics on the part of both politicians as well as corporate houses. This led to the debate of bringing in more transparency in matters relating to political campaign finances. Such reforms are being supported by political parties as well as business houses. Some business houses are not very happy with the unreasonable demands from some political quarters, while the behavior of some politicians and political parties under the influence of money-power has also brought down the image of governments. There are some differences in the manner and extent of implementation though. Such attempts to regulate campaign finances are being supported by people at large and if theirs is any opposition, it comes from within the political establishment. In USA the common term for such political efforts is campaign finance reform (Chapman, 1999). In US campaign funds are generated by the politicians and the political parties' mainly using four sources (Cantor, 2007); i. Own funds of political leaders, their family and friends ii. By soliciting contributions from individual citizens iii. Using the party funds (which too require to be replenished from time to time) iv. Different interest groups (comprised business etc) generally with the formation of political action committees (PAC) on political, social or economic issues. v. Public funds (available only for some elections like Presidential elections) A first timer to politics will of course use his/ her own funds to start with, but 'experienced' political rely too heavily on fat contributions from other sources. The political parties too expect from a politician that if he is using the party funds, the he must try to replenish such funds from appropriate sources. Business houses and chambers of trade and commerce are the only one's wielding the fund stick for such need. In this era of information technology, while on the one hand internet has become a potent tool of propagating political ideologies, on the other Internet has made it possible to solicit campaign funds from a wide spectrum of sympathizers. For US elections, a person sitting in China, Latin America, Africa or any where can contribute simultaneously. While the government generally keeps an eye on donations/ contributions from abroad as the credentials of such donors are not fully verified. But internet contributions have made this task very difficult. The need is therefore felt for matching reforms. To deal with problems of campaigns, attempts are being made for quite a while now. The Federal Election Campaign Finance Act (FECA) of 1971 was one such formal attempt to deal with this issue. But a comprehensive rule or standard is yet to come up. The growing trend of PACs for campaign finances, in itself seems to be a reasonable solution instead of individual company or organization. This also helps in concealing the identity of the individual or the organization. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, some of the top 10 donors to campaign funds since 1989 are2; Rank Organisation name Total contributions 1 American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $38,090,299 2 AT&T Inc $36,920,985 3 National Assn of Realtors $30,289,54 4 National Education Assn $27,077,950 5 American Assn for Justice $27,075,356 6 Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $25,572,741 7 Laborers Union $24,981,639 8 Goldman Sachs $24,852,411 9 Service Employees International Union $24,649,143 10 Carpenters & Joiners Union $24,388,370 This clearly indicates that the interest groups want their favorite candidates to win so that they can work towards implementing their agenda. There is lot on stake for political leaders as well, so they too try to mobilize as much as they can. During the last Presidential elections President Bush was able to raise twice as much money as Senator Kerry. References: 1. Cantor, Joseph E., The State of Campaign Finance, available online at, http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/election04/campaign$.htm (March 7, 2007) 2. Chapman, Bert (1999), Campaign finance information: an overview of print and Internet resources. Reference Services Review Volume 27 Number 3, 1999 MCB University Press 3. McSweeney, Dean (2005). Reform in a Cold Climate: Change in US Campaign Finance Law. Government and Opposition Ltd 2005, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford 4. The Center for Responsive Politics, Top All-Time Donor Profiles, available online at http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.asporder=A (March 7, 2007) 5. Gill, Kathy. Money, Politics and Advocacy. Available online at http://uspolitics.about.com/od/finance/i/advocacy_2.htm (March 8, 2007) Read More