CommunityFDL Main BlogThe Bullpen

Report: 2014 Midterms Had More Money And Fewer Donors

File:USCurrency Federal Reserve.jpg

A new report from the Center for Responsive Politics shows that after all the spending is calculated the 2014 midterm elections were the most expensive in history and had a fewer number of donors than the previous midterm. The slow but steady march to plutocracy continued as fewer and fewer donors gave more and more.

The total amount of money spent according to the report was $3.77 billion. The average contribution for an individual rose to a record high of $2,639 with an 11% decline in the total amount of contributors from the 2010 midterm election – 869,602 donors in 2010 vs. 773,582 in 2014.

So fewer people are giving more – might they want more in return? When will American elections officially become auctions?

A key theme of the 2014 election spending was the shift away from an ever-broadening base of financial support toward reliance on fewer donors who gave more. Spending by outside groups — organization that can accept donations of any amount and thus are largely fueled by a small pool of extremely wealthy individuals — was a larger chunk of the total cost of the election than ever before…

Every area of traditional campaign finance saw a decline in the number of donors. Despite the increased cost of this election, the records that a number of races set in terms of overall cost and a huge focus on fundraising, there were just 434,256 identifiable individual donors to candidates in the 2014 election. That’s 107,000 fewer than there were in the 2010 election.

And this does not factor in ramp ups on the state level where moneyed interests can have just as pernicious of an effect on policymaking, if not more so. In some states candidates to be judges on the state supreme court can raise money which also increased in 2014 and could threaten the independence of judicial rulings.

There is already abundant evidence that money is distorting the democratic process in US politics. The continued narrowing of who participates in campaign fundraising with a corresponding escalation in the amount of money raised can only worsen this trend.

CommunityThe Bullpen

Report: 2014 Midterms Had More Money And Fewer Donors

File:USCurrency Federal Reserve.jpg

A new report from the Center for Responsive Politics shows that after all the spending is calculated the 2014 midterm elections were the most expensive in history and had a fewer number of donors than the previous midterm. The slow but steady march to plutocracy continued as fewer and fewer donors gave more and more.

The total amount of money spent according to the report was $3.77 billion. The average contribution for an individual rose to a record high of $2,639 with an 11% decline in the total amount of contributors from the 2010 midterm election – 869,602 donors in 2010 vs. 773,582 in 2014.

So fewer people are giving more – might they want more in return? When will American elections officially become auctions?

A key theme of the 2014 election spending was the shift away from an ever-broadening base of financial support toward reliance on fewer donors who gave more. Spending by outside groups — organization that can accept donations of any amount and thus are largely fueled by a small pool of extremely wealthy individuals — was a larger chunk of the total cost of the election than ever before…

Every area of traditional campaign finance saw a decline in the number of donors. Despite the increased cost of this election, the records that a number of races set in terms of overall cost and a huge focus on fundraising, there were just 434,256 identifiable individual donors to candidates in the 2014 election. That’s 107,000 fewer than there were in the 2010 election.

And this does not factor in ramp ups on the state level where moneyed interests can have just as pernicious of an effect on policymaking, if not more so. In some states candidates to be judges on the state supreme court can raise money which also increased in 2014 and could threaten the independence of judicial rulings.

There is already abundant evidence that money is distorting the democratic process in US politics. The continued narrowing of who participates in campaign fundraising with a corresponding escalation in the amount of money raised can only worsen this trend.

Previous post

Ukraine Army Retreats, Poroshenko Wants International Peacekeepers

Next post

Report: 2014 Midterms Had More Money And Fewer Donors

Dan Wright

Dan Wright

Daniel Wright is a longtime blogger and currently writes for Shadowproof. He lives in New Jersey, by choice.