Money in the 2000 Elections

Abstract

THE ROLE AND IMPACT OF MONEY in elections has been a central issue in election law for decades, most obviously since the Watergate scandal under President Nixon and the ensuing attempts at reform. David Magleby, Professor of Political Science at Brigham Young University, has been a prominent scholar researching this subject for many years. In this edited volume covering the 2000 elections, he continues the work of the Citizens Research Foundation to examine money in American presidential elections, work done for many years by Herbert Alexander. Because disclosure laws have made the material on the amounts spent more accessible in general, and because more groups are now involved in disseminating this information (such as the Center for Responsive Politics), the Citizens Research Foundation sees its focus “less on the provision of raw data and more on the encouragement of solid analysis,”1 and that is the intended focus of this volume. Yet much of its usefulness does come in providing raw data on money in the 2000 elections, and many of its authors note the limitations of disclosure laws, especially in the hard-to-measure loophole of “issue advocacy” advertising. Given the complexity of campaign finance laws, time must be spent explaining Buckley v. Valeo,2 and terms such as “soft money,” “issue advocacy,” and “magic words.” There is some repetition in the volume on these subjects. More references to the first explanations of these concepts might have made for a tighter book. While the volume does engage in useful analysis of the kinds of money collected and how it was spent, the analysis focuses more on comparisons of raw amounts with previous years and the development of new or bigger loopholes for contributing and spending. The breakdown of the original 1974 system of federal regulation of money in campaigns is discussed by many of the contributors, who note that the Supreme Court, the Federal Election Commission, and clever lawyers and politicians have all contributed to this breakdown. Less attention is given to the consequences of money in our election system—consequences for candidate recruitment, candidate behavior, political party ideologies, government policies and regulations, and sector giving. Those interested in the consequences of both major parties needing and going after major corporate donors will not find that analysis here. For those wanting information on Enron or WorldCom behavior, labor union behavior, and other interest group behavior, the Center for Responsive Politics (www.opensecrets.org),