This year’s spending to elect a president and members of Congress will hit at least $15.9 billion – putting 2024 on track to become the nation’s most expensive federal election, according to a new analysis from OpenSecrets, a nonpartisan organization that tracks money in politics.
Effective campaigns spend more time getting votes than money.
I legitimately don’t even know how this much money is even spent, no one watches cable so ad buys are cheap. Spam texts/emails are essentially free, Internet/social media ads are also dirt cheap…
The only way it makes sense is they’re taking the money and using it to hold those huge fundraiser diners to make more money.
We’re running the political parties like corporations that only care about profits instead of an organization to get Dems in office.
The fact that after the election ends the candidates keep access to these funds is a big part of the problem. Win or lose if you have millions left in your campaign account you get to just keep spending it.
The ultimate problem is, even if they are cheap, if one side has more money than the other, then that side can outspend the other on ads, meaning they get larger outreach, potentially more influence (tho money doesn’t always buy influence - who wants to take the risk), and so on.
I legitimately don’t even know how this much money is even spent,
Not even that hard, transfer to a “leadership pac” and you can spend it on anything, like a new motorhome for a Supreme Court Justice, or for yourself.
There’s practically zero rules about what someone does with it
Well, err, not all funds are campaign funds. Political Action Committee funds, are not campaign funds. So they don’t mind the same rules. But, yes, candidates retain funds they don’t spend and rules apply such as they can’t spend for personal use but can transfer money to other campaigns or to the party. So far Harris, by my read, has transferred 20 million to down ballot campaigns
Political Action Committee funds, are not campaign funds. So they don’t mind the same rules.
And one of the ways to launder campaign cash after an election is transfer to a PAC that they control…
A significant amount of that article is about it. That’s why I thought it was relevant enough to link
There is one significant loophole in this process, however. That is the little-regulated leadership PAC, a political committee that is directly or indirectly established, financed, maintained or controlled by a candidate or an individual holding a federal office. A candidate can opt to transfer their money into one of these entities.
“And the rules for leadership PACs are completely different than the rules for your official campaign committee,” Deborah explains, “So the personal use rule doesn’t apply there. You can use it for travel, you can use it for dinner, concert tickets, all in the name of fundraising. There’s just not that much scrutiny on it. And politicians have used their leadership PACs quite lavishly. So that’s that’s another that’s a huge loophole that I mean, neither side seems keen on closing at this point.”
It’s important to note that the FEC has a number of vacancies right now. In order to meet and review audits and complaints, the Committee must comprise at least four members. Currently there are just three, and Congress is unlikely to confirm a fourth soon. Even if someone were to notice wrongdoing or violation in the bounds of a leadership PAC, there isn’t much that could be done.
Also:
So far Harris, by my read, has transferred 20 million to down ballot campaigns
Do you think that’s more than the “victory fund” has taken from state parties this cycle?
If I took $5 and gave you $2 back how would you feel about me bragging about giving you $2 out of the kindness of my heart?
It’s important to note that the FEC has a number of vacancies right now. In order to meet and review audits and complaints, the Committee must comprise at least four members. Currently there are just three, and Congress is unlikely to confirm a fourth soon. Even if someone were to notice wrongdoing or violation in the bounds of a leadership PAC, there isn’t much that could be done.
To me this is the bit to worry about the most. What little rules do exist couldn’t even be enforced.
And which party can we expect to a) not follow the rules and b) wait for the stature of limitations to expire and get away with cheating?
This is not a good thing.
Effective campaigns spend more time getting votes than money.
I legitimately don’t even know how this much money is even spent, no one watches cable so ad buys are cheap. Spam texts/emails are essentially free, Internet/social media ads are also dirt cheap…
The only way it makes sense is they’re taking the money and using it to hold those huge fundraiser diners to make more money.
We’re running the political parties like corporations that only care about profits instead of an organization to get Dems in office.
The fact that after the election ends the candidates keep access to these funds is a big part of the problem. Win or lose if you have millions left in your campaign account you get to just keep spending it.
https://www.nhpr.org/politics/2020-11-25/ask-civics-101-what-happens-to-campaign-funds-after-an-election-is-over
Well, you can use money to buy outreach. Which can bring in more votes. So they are connected.
One of the reasons Biden dropped out was because donors had decided to withhold money from his campaign.
I imagine it’s more popular in certain parts of the US (e.g. the midwest). In particular where we need to pull never trumper votes away.
Texts cost money. Emails are not free either if you are doing it with a high enough volume. See https://sendpulse.com/knowledge-base/email-service/general/how-much-bulk-email-costs for a comparison. (This is because it costs the underlying ISP some money to deal with the traffic involved.)
The ultimate problem is, even if they are cheap, if one side has more money than the other, then that side can outspend the other on ads, meaning they get larger outreach, potentially more influence (tho money doesn’t always buy influence - who wants to take the risk), and so on.
Actual campaign funds have to be reported regarding spending, you can view that info over at https://www.fec.gov/data/browse-data/
This stuff is generally opaque and hard to understand, but a good “rule-of-thumb” kind of guide to it is available at https://www.propublica.org/article/how-to-understand-political-contributions-campaign-finance
Agreed.
They’re giving it to friends for “consultancy” who then give them money back, also for “consultancy”.
Not even that hard, transfer to a “leadership pac” and you can spend it on anything, like a new motorhome for a Supreme Court Justice, or for yourself.
There’s practically zero rules about what someone does with it
Yes. Another reason why Citizens United (2010) was so bad…
Well, err, not all funds are campaign funds. Political Action Committee funds, are not campaign funds. So they don’t mind the same rules. But, yes, candidates retain funds they don’t spend and rules apply such as they can’t spend for personal use but can transfer money to other campaigns or to the party. So far Harris, by my read, has transferred 20 million to down ballot campaigns
And one of the ways to launder campaign cash after an election is transfer to a PAC that they control…
A significant amount of that article is about it. That’s why I thought it was relevant enough to link
Also:
Do you think that’s more than the “victory fund” has taken from state parties this cycle?
If I took $5 and gave you $2 back how would you feel about me bragging about giving you $2 out of the kindness of my heart?
To me this is the bit to worry about the most. What little rules do exist couldn’t even be enforced.
And which party can we expect to a) not follow the rules and b) wait for the stature of limitations to expire and get away with cheating?