Quantcast
Connect with us

Here’s why American billionaires may not be able to buy the 2016 election

Published

on

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has one; Texas Senator Ted Cruz has one; even former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, considered a longshot for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, has a billionaire in his corner. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has two.

Campaign finance watchdog groups fear heavy spending by these ultra-rich Americans will warp the election – already expected to be the most money-soaked in history. The idea that billionaires can buy elections has taken root in the public imagination.

ADVERTISEMENT

Those billionaires are now seeing small, early signs of a pushback. Whether these are the beginning of a new trend is far too soon to say, but polls show there is wider discontent about the perceived influence of big money in U.S. politics and a growing gulf between the country’s very rich and very poor.

These nascent rumblings – along with evidence that the super-rich are inefficient political spenders – raise questions about how effective billionaires will be in the 2016 elections.

Some voters in Philadelphia, for example, were turned off by the billionaires backing a top candidate in the city’s May 19 mayoral race. And a Silicon Valley startup, Crowdpac, is hoping to bank on public ire against big political spenders to attract small donations to its new for-profit election campaign crowdfunding platform.

“There’s growing public awareness about rich people trying to buy elections and that makes the task of winning all the more difficult,” said Darrell West, the author of “Billionaires: Reflections on the Upper Crust,” and the director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution think tank.

ADVERTISEMENT

Potential big donors dispute the notion they are trying to buy elections and say they are simply using their positions to try to influence the future of the country in a positive way.

“I do believe – and I’ve told my kids this – that I can do more for them by giving money to the right presidential candidate in 2016 than by leaving them double that amount in my will,” said David Walsh, a retired investor living in Jackson, Wyoming, who would not disclose his net worth but has given several multi-million dollar gifts to charitable causes and said he planned to donate heavily to candidates in 2016.

Miami car dealership mogul Norman Braman has been outspoken about backing his longtime protege Rubio; financial investor Foster Friess was in the audience cheering Santorum on when he announced his presidential bid two weeks ago; and Bob Mercer, the founder of a New York hedge fund, has been identified as supporting Cruz. The billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch have publicly vowed to spend nearly $900 million influencing races in 2016.

ADVERTISEMENT

PHILADELPHIA STORY

Amid the populist outcry against CEO pay and income inequality there may be some risks in candidates being so publicly linked to the extremely rich.

In Philadelphia, Anthony Hardy Williams was considered the favorite for the city’s next mayor. He won support from three billionaires, Joel Greenberg, Jeff Yass and Arthur Dantchik, founders of the Susquehanna International Group, a global financial firm headquartered in a Philadelphia suburb. The three backed Williams, encouraging voters to support his views on a hot-button education policy issue.

ADVERTISEMENT

They spent nearly $7 million on television ads promoting Williams. In response, unions and other community groups, who opposed Williams’s education platform, coalesced around another candidate, Jim Kenney. One of the groups, Action United, organized a march in front of SIG’s offices with placards that said, “Stop billionaires from buying our next mayor!”

“I would have looked seriously at Williams if not for the money,” said JoAnn Seaver, 85, a retired teacher who voted for Kenney. She was one of several Philadelphia voters Reuters interviewed on election day who said Williams’ billionaire backers were a turnoff. “You don’t think that money should govern people who are elected, but what do you do, just let the billionaires take over?”

A spokesman for Williams declined to comment. Through a spokesman, the three billionaires declined to comment.

ADVERTISEMENT

FIGHTING BACK

Crowdpac, an online political fundraising platform that works like Kickstarter – an online tool that lets entrepreneurs gather funding for new projects through small donations – sees fighting billionaires as part of its business model. Mason Harrison, the site’s political director, says Crowdpac wants to get more middle-class people involved in politics by hosting smaller donation drives for candidates.

“We have a lack of money from small donors in American politics, and if we have more people involved in the political process we can make great strides in terms of diluting the influence from special interests,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

A veteran of Republican Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign, Harrison is not the typical liberal voice decrying money in politics. But Crowdpac’s Twitter tagline sounds very similar to the calls from non-profit watchdog groups to level the political playing field. It reads: “Together we can beat the big donors.”

BIG MONEY, NOT SMART MONEY

Inefficiency could also dampen the effects of billionaires’ political spending. (Graphic: http://reut.rs/1Rw4GHF)

ADVERTISEMENT

“When you have political amateurs or novices with a strong issue or ideological position in which they have intense belief and are willing to put their money behind it, the money itself is no guarantee of victory,” said Michael Traugott, a political science professor at the University of Michigan who studies the influence of money on political races.

Studies of the 2012 and 2014 elections by the Sunlight Foundation, a Washington-based non-profit that tracks political spending, show most groups backed by billionaires had less success swaying election outcomes than groups controlled by trade organizations or professional political strategists. The Sunlight study does not offer any explanation for this difference.

Former hedge fund founder Tom Steyer, who backed Democrats through his Nextgen Climate Action Committee, spent $79 million in the 2014 congressional elections, $17.9 million of which was directed toward influencing specific races. Sunlight found Steyer had a 32 percent success rate on the $17.9 million spent.

ADVERTISEMENT

For some, failure was total. Evidence from news reports shows that casino magnate Sheldon Adelson spent more than $100 million in 2012 in donations to trade groups, political action committees and candidates, only to watch virtually all his chosen candidates – including presidential hopefuls Newt Gingrich and Romney – lose.

Other groups have seen more success. The Kochs’ Americans for Prosperity saw a 95 percent success rate in 2014.

But its string of victories isn’t flawless. It ran negative TV ads against Ethan Berkowitz, a candidate in this year’s mayoral race in Anchorage, Alaska. Local strategists said the ads only increased Berkowitz’s name recognition.

ADVERTISEMENT

Jeremy Price, the state director for Americans for Prosperity in Alaska, said the ads were meant to show Berkowitz’s record on spending, highlighting an issue rather than a candidate.

Berkowitz won the race.

(Reporting By Emily Flitter, editing by Ross Colvin)

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. Like you, we here at Raw Story believe in the power of progressive journalism — and we’re investing in investigative reporting as other publications give it the ax. Raw Story readers power David Cay Johnston’s DCReport, which we've expanded to keep watch in Washington. We’ve exposed billionaire tax evasion and uncovered White House efforts to poison our water. We’ve revealed financial scams that prey on veterans, and legal efforts to harm workers exploited by abusive bosses. We’ve launched a weekly podcast, “We’ve Got Issues,” focused on issues, not tweets. And unlike other news outlets, we’ve decided to make our original content free. But we need your support to do what we do.

Raw Story is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. We’re not part of a conglomerate, or a project of venture capital bros. From unflinching coverage of racism, to revealing efforts to erode our rights, Raw Story will continue to expose hypocrisy and harm. Unhinged from billionaires and corporate overlords, we fight to ensure no one is forgotten.

We need your support to keep producing quality journalism and deepen our investigative reporting. Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Invest with us in the future. Make a one-time contribution to Raw Story Investigates, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click to donate by check.

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. Like you, we here at Raw Story believe in the power of progressive journalism — and we’re investing in investigative reporting as other publications give it the ax. Raw Story readers power David Cay Johnston’s DCReport, which we've expanded to keep watch in Washington. We’ve exposed billionaire tax evasion and uncovered White House efforts to poison our water. We’ve revealed financial scams that prey on veterans, and efforts to harm workers exploited by abusive bosses. We’ve launched a weekly podcast, “We’ve Got Issues,” focused on issues, not tweets. Unlike other news sites, we’ve decided to make our original content free. But we need your support to do what we do.

Raw Story is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. We’re not part of a conglomerate, or a project of venture capital bros. From unflinching coverage of racism, to revealing efforts to erode our rights, Raw Story will continue to expose hypocrisy and harm. Unhinged from corporate overlords, we fight to ensure no one is forgotten.

We need your support to keep producing quality journalism and deepen our investigative reporting. Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Invest with us in the future. Make a one-time contribution to Raw Story Investigates, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you.



Report typos and corrections to: [email protected]. Send news tips to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump promoting himself as the ‘second coming of God’ is another sign of his lack of basic mental capacity: Yale psychiatrist

Published

on

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump retweeted an anti-Semitic super-fan who compared Trump to the "second coming of God." That was after he made comments Tuesday suggesting that Jews who vote for Democrats are traitorous to Israel. The comments come after a long summer of Trump accusing members of the Squad of being anti-Semitic and suggesting that the Clintons are responsible for disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein's death in jail.

Raw Story spoke with Dr. Bandy X. Lee, a forensic psychiatrist and violence expert at Yale School of Medicine, about the president's fitness for office. Lee helped launch a public health approach to global violence prevention as a consultant to the World Health Organization and other United Nations bodies since 2002. She authored the textbook, “Violence: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Causes, Consequences, and Cures,” which shows how the dangerous psychology of individuals is connected to dangerous societies and cultures, including their politics and economics. She and several coauthors of the public-service book, “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 37 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President,” prepared a mental health analysis of the president using information in the Mueller report (dangerouscase.org).

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump has now humiliated his own ambassador to Denmark twice in just one day

Published

on

President Donald Trump's statements about the Danish government over the past 24 hours have made things awkward for Carla Sands, the former soap opera actress and chiropractor whom the president appointed to be America's ambassador to Denmark.

On Tuesday, Sands sent out a tweet that hyped up the president's scheduled visit to Denmark -- only to have the president announce on Twitter that he was canceling the event just hours later because the country's prime minister would not entertain his pitch to sell Greenland to the United States.

Denmark is ready for the POTUS @realDonaldTrump visit! Partner, ally, friend 🇺🇸🇩🇰 pic.twitter.com/6VEtR1mbay

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

GOP is still accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars from a megadonor caught in prostitution scandal

Published

on

In February, Republican megadoner John W. Childs was charged with soliciting prostitution at a Florida massage parlor.

Childs was charged in the same sting that implicated Robert Kraft, the outspoken owner of the Eagles.

Since the sting, Childs has continued to be a major funder to Republican groups and candidates, reports CNBC.

He's given a total of $330,000 to Republicans, according to FEC filings.

The primary recipients of his largesse have been the Republican National Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Continue Reading
 
 

Thank you for whitelisting Raw Story!

As a special thank you, from now until August 31st, we're offering you a discounted rate of $5.99/month to subscribe and get ad-free access. We're honored to have you as a reader. Thank you. :) —Elias, Membership Coordinator
LEARN MORE
close-link
close-image