A man in a navy Armani suit sits at the head of a stretching oak table. His hair is impeccably sculpted and he has an overly large grin plastered on his face. He proudly displays an American flag on his lapel. Seated at equal intervals along the sides of the table sit people of various gender, ethnicity, and background. The constant in the group, however, is wealth. Each of these people represent a dollar number to the man, the candidate, seated at the head (or foot) of the table. The people at the table chat politely amongst one another as the eat an outrageously priced meal of seafood. The candidate pledges to the guests that he has their interests in mind and that, when he is elected, their ideologies will be thoroughly advanced through his policy. The only event that could derail is track to victory, he warns them, is being outspent by his opposition, who, he reminds them, is no supporter of their cause. The candidate, a living, breathing Ken doll, has been molded by this group and their prospective campaign contributions. Among modern politicians, he is normal. How else are politicians expected to gain the money to produce the frightening campaign ads necessary to win an election other than fawn over special interest groups?
We have witnessed the commercialization of democracy in America. Pecuniary spending of campaigns has increased exponentially in the last twenty years, illustrating the primacy of money in modern elections. As money commonly does, it has tainted America’s elections and marred its democracy. As we have seen monetary spending increase in elections, special interest groups and wealthy investors have simultaneously seen their political clout snowball. Meanwhile, voters, as well as the issues and facts have been alienated.
The recent spike in campaign spending has translated into significantly more campaign advertisements, clever speeches, and political stunts, while little has been allocated to developing stronger policy and spreading facts and awareness of issues to the public. Essentially, smoke and mirrors, glitz and glamour, go hand in hand with campaign spending. Thus, Logos and Ethos, once a candidates best friend (or, more commonly, worst enemy), have become dwarfed by their brother Pathos, and superseded by false constructions of character and facts purchased with campaign money; money used to obfuscate issues, concealing the truth, manipulating voters. Image has rapidly replaced politicians’ positions on issues important to voters. Television, on which dozens of debates and thousands of campaign ads run each election year, is a primary receptor of campaign funds. As television (along with campaign spending) began to play an increasingly large part in elections, politicians, instead of using such a penetrating, powerful medium to express their positions on matters, used it as a platform for disinformation, rhetorical contortion, and political exploitation, concealing the their true essence and identity. A candidate starts with only his policy, record, and beliefs. As he spends campaign money, he constructs a labyrinth of mirrors, smoke, and special effects, resulting only in the broadcasting of a completely distorted image of the candidate to the electorate. The people lose. Corporations, special interests, and fraudulent politicians win.
Corresponding with increased election spending is increased dependence on the wealthy. In order to spend more money, candidates have had to reach more deeply into the pockets of corporations and the affluent. Largely, candidates are merely investments to the wealthy: Special interest groups and corporations invest in the politicians they believe will actively support their interests by supporting policy favorable to them. Unfortunately, the interest groups and corporations who most frequently invest in candidates are those most unpopular with the public, such as the tobacco, oil, and pharmaceutical industries. Candidates, once elected, are beholden to those who donated appreciable amounts of money to their campaigns; they are obligated to pass legislation beneficial to these industries. The people pay the price. Polluters harming public health are given subsidies and special treatment, while the populace suffers. Pharmaceuticals inflating their prices in order to boost their already swollen profits are allowed to continue to do so, while the poor are forced to go without essential medication.
When the People are perceived as less important than the wealthy by politicians, when the People are intentionally deceived by rhetorical sleights of hand and acts of political chicanery, when the People suffer at the hands of the corporation, the affluent, the wealthy special interest group, and the government turns the other cheek, or more commonly, actively assists in the exploitation of the populace, then democracy is most certainly harmed, tarnished by its own currency, ailed by the cancer of election spending.
WE can change this. WE can make a difference. While campaign spending has deceived many, those truly interested in the political process (whom, I believe, number in the millions) remain pertinacious in their quest for candor, intelligence, and leadership. While those truly concerned with politics are a numerical minority, we can still initiate change by coming out in force for election spending reforms. Immerse yourself in the issue, become educated, for an opinion, then tell everyone you know, write to the media and Congress. Its not idealistic to believe change can occur.
