ETVT most significant problem with the US electoral system is campaign finance Flashcards
Theme 1: campaign finance effective?
Campaign finance refers to the regulation of money in elections, including limits on contributions and disclosure requirements. This was brought about through FECA in 1974.
This can be through ‘matching funds’ – meaning that the federal government would ‘match’ any contribution made up to $250.
Theme 1: examples of how effective has campaign finance been?
Created Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 2002 attempted to further limit and control spending on political campaigning. Republician donors used to rely on short money but were forced to move to hard money following the law being passed.
Foreign Contribution Bans (2016-2020) created due to suspections of donations being recieved through foreign sources like Igor Fruman 2020
Explain theme 1: How does this show effectiveness?
It promote transparency and fairness by limiting the influence of large, unregulated contributions. Soft money being restricted enforces coordinated spening caps and prevents foriegn influence.
FECA ensures that political parties comply with the rules and prevents influence from wealthy donors and outside interests.
Starting Counter 1: Is the FECA always effective?
Candidates can just choose to not use funds like matching funds which can make the FECA weaker in it’s scrutiny ability and can be ineffective in making it fair.
Through use of super PACs and 527s
Counter point 1: Campaign finance ineffective?
Soft money can be used through loopholes, allowing business or interest groups to spend on campaign advertising without directly donating.
Counter point 1: Why is campaign finance difficult to reform?
There is a lack of legislation and difficulty in passing reforms through Congress.
Counter example 1: examples of CF being ineffective?
SC ruling in Citizens United v. FEC 2010 allowed donor groups like Super PACs to have influence on campaigns. they are only forbidden from making any direct contributions to federal candidates or parties.
Super PACs spent most of their money negatively – advocating the defeat of President Obama. Even liberal Super PACs spent most of their money advocating the defeat of Governor Romney.
Super PACs can raise money unlimitedly they raised and spent almost $300 million in the 2016 election; again much of this was negative content. By 2020 this figure had grown to over $2 billion.
Counter explain 1: How does it make CF ineffective?
It gives wealthy individuals or groups an indirect influence on elections and bypasses contribution limits, weakens the intent of limiting big money influence.
Theme 2: primaries and caucuses effective?
enhancing voter engagement/participation
Theme example 2: examples of these being effective
Iowa in 2020 saw participants physically gathering to discus and vote for candidate
2024 New Hampshire had its largest turnout with 300,000 voters voting in the Republican primary
Counter explain 2: how does it make P & Cs effective?
allowing voters to partake in choosing their party’s candidate has ensured that nominees reflect the party’s preference
Counter point 2: P & C ineffective?
It can produce widespread voter apathy and boredom, particularly when an incumbent president is involved – this usually reduces turnout.
The process is far too long.
Counter example 2: examples of primaries and causes being ineffective?
Iowa caucus 2020 had a turnout of 9.1%
Joe Biden announced his candidacy for the 2020 race 558 days before!
Counter explain 2:
Caucuses being lengthy may lead to voters feeling their votes won’t influence the outcome. They are also likely to lose interest.
Theme 3: EC effective?
It gives smaller states a voice in presidential elections, ensuring they are not ignored.
