How Does the Problem of Money and Campaign Financing in American Political System Affect Business - Essay Example

According to Robert Perrucci and Earl Wysong (2007), in 2004, the cash required to mount winning political campaigns complete with paid staff, computers, polling consultants, phone banks, direct mailing, websites, and media advertising topped out at $367 million for the presidency (not counting indirect party funding or expenditures by 527 committees), $7.

3 million for a Senate seat, and $1.14 million for a House seat. (p. 150) The incredible amount is partly due to the changed process of the American political system wherein primaries have become the chief means by which candidates get nominated and parties have shrunk in importance in the nominating process. This means that there is a necessity for, say a Presidential candidate, to campaign across the nation and before the voting public to win the political exercise whereas in the past candidates only had to woo party leaders.

The campaign effort will be replicated in the election proper. The result of all these, particularly the latter information, is that political parties have no strong function in the American political system. The bulk of campaign funding for the candidates comes from sources other than party funds. And so when the candidate wins, his or her policies are his own. An interesting variable in this equation emerges: here the candidate is in effect more beholden to private donors that funded the winning campaign more than his or her party’s programs because they have a bigger contribution.

There is a growing dependence by American political leaders on moneyed individuals and organized interests such as corporations and unions which often expect returns for their favors. Therefore, in policy-making, the influence of these contributors as a third party is very significant. To illustrate this, we have the case of Congress wherein there is a growing perception that private contributors, particularly the “political action committees” (PAC) are helping shift the political balance towards the right.

Gordon Adams (1981) emphasized this as he wrote: A PAC contribution, in conjunction with other government relations work, can help cement the relationship between industrial and the Congressional sides of the “iron triangle.” PAC committees are becoming involved with internal corporate political education programs for managers, supervisors, and employees and help plan grass-roots lobbying. (p. 111)Adams has also suggested that the defeat of labor on issues such as common situs picketing, labor law reform, and the Consumer Protection Agency is linked to corporate PAC giving. (p. 111

According to Ken Kollman (1998), business corporations altogether spent nearly $8 million in the final weeks of the pro-NAFTA lobbying campaign, not to mention the millions of dollars in Washington spent by the Mexican government to promote the pact. (p. 136)