Children grow up in the United States hearing about the
greatness of our democracy and system of free elections. What could possibly be
more fair than a system in which each vote counts? When the results are tallied
and the winner is chosen, a multi-billionaire’s vote carries no more weight
than that of an unemployed parent struggling to make ends meet. That is the
miracle of our system: We all become equals when we enter the voting booth.
The problem with this rosy picture is that it does not take
into account that the electoral process is controlled by corporate interests
that flood the system with money.
Before politicians can be elected, they have to be selected.
They need millions of dollars in campaign contributions in order to be viable
candidates. How do they get that kind of money? From rich people, by showing
that they will back policies that help the 1%.
The Republican and Democratic parties are both supported by
the big money donors in a cozy relationship, with each party holding ruling
power in the White House, Senate and House of Representatives at different
times. There has been talk of instituting “campaign finance reform” to get the
big money interests out of politics, but such reforms will never change the
essential role of money in politics because the reforms will be crafted by
politicians who are beholden to the big donors.
Money has always played a prominent role in political
campaigns, but that role has become more blatant in the wake of Citizens United
v. Federal Election Commission, a 2010 Supreme Court case. The court, in a 5-4
decision, allowed corporations to make unlimited donations to political
campaigns.
The ruling, which overturned earlier precedents and portions
of the 2002 campaign finance reform act known as McCain-Feingold, was based on
interpreting campaign donations as an expression of “free speech,” and thus
protected by the First Amendment. Many have ridiculed the notion that
corporations are like human beings whose free speech rights cannot be abridged.
The decision opened the way to the creation of “Super”
PACs—Political Action Committees—that ostensibly operate independently of
candidates’ actual campaign organizations.
The 2012 campaign has already seen outlandish political
donations from the super rich. Sheldon Adelson, chairman of Las Vegas Sands
Corporation, announced he would donate $5 million to a PAC for his friend Newt
Gingrich. This was followed by an announcement that Adelson’s wife, Miriam,
would make an additional $5 million donation.
The Citizens United ruling will unleash a flood of Super PAC
money in this election year, but campaigns were already rolling in cash by
2008. The Obama campaign received approximately $750 million, so much that they
chose not to receive public funding, which would come with restrictions. While
Obama won in 2008 with promises of “hope and change,” he received more than his
rival John McCain in donations associated with Wall Street firms, the very
companies at the heart of the financial crisis.
What to expect in 2012: The firm MediaVest has reported that
political advertising may increase as much as 30 percent over the 2008
election, totaling as much as $4 billion.
Under capitalism, there’s only democracy for the
capitalists—because the capitalist class holds state power. Real democracy—in
which the interests of the vast majority are represented—can only exist when
the majority, the working class, holds power. Only under socialism.
