Follow the Money: How Cash Subverts Democracy

Democracy isn’t free. For example, during the 2020 electoral races, federal candidates spent more than $14 billion in campaign costs, and state elections ran close to $2 billion. What’s most alarming is that nearly 90% of the US House candidates who spent the most money won their elections.

This isn’t really new. In ancient Greece, Athenians chose legislators by lot and thought that ordinary people who took part in politics should be paid, much to the outrage of some philosophers such as Plato who deemed democracy the most expensive and corrupt political system in existence. Both Plato and Socrates purported that democracy centers on power-seeking individuals who are motivated by personal and financial gain, which makes them susceptible to corruption, which eventually leads to tyranny.

Corruption in politics is nothing new in the US, and elsewhere in the world. During the Harding administration, Interior Secretary Albert Fall, a member of the so-called “Ohio Gang” of confidantes was accused of accepting nearly $400,000 in bribes in exchange for oil leases in Wyoming. The Grant administration was particularly known for corruption and bribery, leading to the term “Grantism.” There were many scandals to choose from during his term, but the most notorious one involved a scheme to siphon millions of dollars in whiskey tax revenues from the U.S. treasury. The conspiracy was widespread, involving revenue agents, distillers, and multiple politicians. 

The Tammany Hall Scandal of 1870. This tale of corruption got its name from Congressman William Magear Tweed, who accepted numerous bribes and kickbacks. “Boss Tweed’s” Ring essentially controlled New York City until 1870, using embezzlement, bribery, and kickbacks to siphon massive chunks of New York’s budget into their own pockets anywhere from $40 million to $200 million).

Money was at the core of the Watergate scandal in the early 70s. In an effort to cover up the break-in at the infamous hotel, President Nixon funneled as much as half a million dollars in campaign funds to the Watergate burglars. In 1989, the Keating Five were accused of accepting a total of $1.3 million in political contributions from Charles Keating, the chairman of Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, to help him resist U.S. federal regulators (which eventually happened).

Of course, there are plenty of scandals in the news today. Six months after leaving the White House, Jared Kushner obtained a $2 billion investment from a fund led by the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, while serving his father-in-law’s administration. Elaine Chao, former Trump transportation secretary, and wife of Republican Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) abused her power while in office. Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., improperly spent $6000 in campaign funds on rent and utilities (her campaign acknowledged this in a filing with the Federal Election Commission, but it said the money had been paid back).

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), the most prominent decision-maker on American energy and climate policy, has spent decades raking in revenue from his private coal business.

Then there’s the “former guy’s” laundry list of corruption. Taxpayers coughed up $2.4 million to pay for Trump’s golf trips in New Jersey and paid for more than 1600 nightly room rentals at Trump properties during his administration, totaling $970,000. Then there are the money laundering claims tied to his failed casinos and golf resorts, and evidence of “dirty” Russian oligarch money funneled into Trump’s various businesses he managed during his presidency.

Election laws in the US, as well as a number of Supreme Court decisions since the 1970s, allow corporations and the ultra-rich to play a central role in dominating campaigns.

Lately, the issue of Russian money has renewed calls to uncover “dark money” in American politics, and the fact that vast sums have been secreted to tropical islands to avoid taxes, and dollars used to exploit U.S. campaign-finance laws to essentially bankroll the manipulation of democracy. In his State of the Union address, President Biden asked Congress to pass the Disclose Act, which would limit the role of dark money in elections and campaigns. The bill’s sponsor, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, of Rhode Island, stated “The fact that all of this has blown up overseas, and we’re demanding all this transparency about foreign autocrats and kleptocrats, gives us a good argument for cleaning this up at home and for focussing public attention.”

Americans support efforts to curtail the costs of election campaigns and curb the “purchasing” of politicians. For example, a recent survey showed that 85% of Americans feel the need to completely rebuild or make major changes to the campaign finance system. 

As Bernie Sanders so aptly stated in 2015, “[T]he millionaire class and the billionaire class increasingly own the political process, and they own the politicians that go to them for money. …we are moving very, very quickly from a democratic society, one person, one vote, to an oligarchic form of society, where billionaires would be determining who the elected officials of this country are.” 

Although Plato may be correct in that Democracy is susceptible to corruption, it doesn’t mean that we can’t fix it. Perhaps if Americans support politicians are more focused on serving their constituents rather than their bank accounts, Democracy can prevail and avoid the descent into oligarchy.