More Money, More Votes

The United States’ presidential election, scheduled to take place in November of 2012, will be very special. This is due not only to the country finding itself in an economic crisis and at a crossroads as a geopolitical power (given its high levels of unemployment and inequality and the tension this is creating) but because large donors and millionaires will have a huge influence on the results.

Until 2010, only individuals (not corporations) could donate money directly to candidates. And these had clear limits on the amounts. But this year the Supreme Court changed the rules on that, allowing donations without limit to independent groups known as Super PACs (Political Action Committee), which have become important players in the electoral cycles. Super PAC SpeechNow.org, accepted legally in July of 2010 after the result announced by the Supreme Court and accepted by the Federal Election Commission, was the first Super PAC of the political kind. These organizations may receive unlimited donations from corporations, unions, associations and individuals to defend or attack a political candidate. But they cannot donate money directly to candidates and have to report the name of the donors to the Federal Election Commission. In addition, a Super PAC cannot formally coordinate its communication or actions with a political campaign, but it can produce advertisements supporting candidates and their ideas and projects. Something of that was already seen in the congressional election of November 2010, where groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which grossed more than $31 million mainly for Republican candidates, emerged as strong advocates of positions in the right and left, spending more than $65 million according to the Federal Election Commission.

During the 2010 elections, the majority of the Super PACs were created by Republican donors. After their defeat, which resulted in the loss of its majority in the House of Representatives, Democrats recognized the value and influence of the Super PACs and established some of these entities to favor their party. Examples include the House Majority PAC as well as that of the AFL-CIO, the country’s largest trade union association.

More than 150 Super PAC entities have already registered for this election cycle. The three main candidates have at least one. Restore Our Future supports presidential candidate Mitt Romney and has already grossed $12.2 million. Priorities USA, created by Jeffrey Katzenberg, who is known as a famous Hollywood investor and co-founder of Dreamworks with Steven Spielberg, has raised about $5 million to support the re-election campaign of President Obama. Rick Perry also counts on the support of several, such as Make Us Great Again, and Jobs for Florida. These new institutions are generating concern among activists in Washington, as they emphasize that non-governmental organizations are being used to push political causes and candidates without any control or limit.

Major donors are allowing independent groups to intervene; innumerable institutions have surfaced behind ideas, candidates and ideologies that are likely to have more importance than the parties themselves. These Super PACs “will likely serve as a candidate’s cavalry, allowing him or her to use a loud and big megaphone to get additional messages out,” said Michael Beckel, Director of the Center for Responsive Politics in Washington. There are also many Super PAC entities that operate independent of candidates. An example of this is Karl Rove’s group, American Crossroads, which in last year’s congressional campaign contributed $28,000,000.

In summation, wealthy donors from left to right will have a huge influence on this November’s election, where the winner will have to face increasing challenges related to the economic and political leadership of United States in the world. Hopefully the demands and concerns of the citizens will also be heard.