Leonardo Angiulo: Money in Politics

Email to a friend Permalink

Monday, April 21, 2014

Leonardo Angiulo, GoLocalWorcester Legal Contributor

April has been a big month for money. Taxes are being paid, the Supreme Court has said campaign contributions are protected by the First Amendment and some college professors allege documentary evidence proves economic elites have an outsize influence in U.S. Government policy decisions. Like I said, money has been in the news a lot lately.

Most people will acknowledge that fundraising is one of the consistent parts of being an elected official. According to a recent paper by Professors Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University, the political process and its financiers have become increasingly intertwined. In fact, one of their assertions is that the preferences of economic elites have far greater impact on U.S. Government policy than the preferences of average citizens.

The professors cite the influence of organized interest groups as a highly significant factor on policy in general and the interests of affluent citizens as the most influential. The vehicle for this influence is found, in part, in lobbying activities. The United States Senate cites the federal law in defining lobbying as things like preparing, planning, researching and other background work for legislation. In practice, as referenced in the Gilens and Page publication, it is well known that laws are sometimes even drafted by lobbyists.

If lobbyists are hired by individuals and groups, and politicians are in a cycle of constant fundraising, then it would be a logical conclusion that someone with financial resources could impact legislative outcomes. This is not to say that envelopes of cash are passing under tables to buy votes. In a more subtle way, well funded candidates could get elected and actually vote their conscience. It just may be that the person, or group, funding that candidate's campaign have a personal interest in line with the politicians ideology. 

How a campaign gets funded has evolved through two major cases focused on First Amendment rights. The first, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, ruled restrictions on corporate and union funding of political speech to be unconstitutional. One example of the speech corporations and unions could engage in after the 2010 ruling is direct advocacy for the election or defeat of a particular candidate. The second case, McCutcheon et al v. Federal Election Commission decided on April 9, 2014 that campaign contribution limits as they existed at that time restricted participation in the political process without preventing corruption or the appearance of corruption and struck as violative of the First Amendment. This decision included the logic that there is a difference between direct quid pro quo corruption, like bribes, and influence in the system due to legitimate participation, like contributing to campaigns.

The response to these cases and the recent publication from Gilens and Page is mixed. The term “oligarchy” is roughly defined as a government controlled by a limited group for their own purposes. Opponents of unlimited contributions and corporate participation in campaigns cite this term when describing our current political system. One theory goes that current precedent is turning our nation into an oligarchy by allowing people and groups with money to hijack U.S. policy.

Another perspective is that some fear of potential corruption, or interest in leveling the playing field level for different economic statuses, does not outweigh an individual's First Amendment right to participate in the electoral process. This second perspective might say that preventing public corruption is an honorable goal, but as soon as we allow the restriction of one type of speech we open the door for other kinds of restrictions that may not be as honorable. If a hallmark of our country is free speech, the logic goes, then that means everyone is afforded that same opportunity to speak freely. Importantly, public corruption can be addressed by other statutes like the criminal offense of honest services fraud that strikes directly at things like bribery that are offensive to clean government.

However people feel about the current situation regarding campaign finance one safeguard we have against tyranny is the ballot box. If you do not like a candidate's past performance, talk about it. Organize yourself with like minded people. If you support a candidate's ideology, contribute to their campaign and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same. And then vote accordingly. As Congressman Tip O'Neill once said, all politics is local.

Leonardo Angiulo is an Attorney with the firm of Glickman, Sugarman, Kneeland & Gribouski in Worcester handling legal matters across the Commonwealth. He can be reached by email at [email protected]. 

---

Related Slideshow: Central MA State Legislature Candidates’ Campaign Finances

Related Articles

• Leonardo Angiulo: Legal Lessons From The Salem State Stabbings
• Leonardo Angiulo: The Consequences of Cohabitation
• Leonardo Angiulo: When a Car Accident Isn’t Just an Accident
• Leonardo Angiulo: Legally Speaking, What is Intent to Distribute?
• Leonardo Angiulo: The Evolution of Federal Sentencing Guidelines
• Leonardo Angiulo: Who Wins in the NFL Concussion Settlement?
• Leonardo Angiulo: ‘Self-Defense’ and Massachusetts Law
• Leonardo Angiulo: MA Supreme Court Brings Wiretapping To Your Cellphone
• Leonardo Angiulo: The Limits of the Presumption of Innocence
• Leonardo Angiulo: Why We Don’t Have The Death Penalty In Mass.
• Leonardo Angiulo: A Good Day for FBI, A Bad Day for Politicians
• Leonardo Angiulo: Mass. Takes 17 Year Olds Off The Criminal Hook
• Leonardo Angiulo: The Royal Baby + Your Estate Planning
• Leonardo Angiulo: Auto Accidents + Recovering Damages
• Leonardo Angiulo: Massachusetts Family Sees Justice After 40 Years
• Leonardo Angiulo: The Steroid Defense For Murder?
• Leonardo Angiulo: Can A Minor Be Arrested For Cyberbullying?
• Leonardo Angiulo: Medical Decision-Making in the Case of Children
• Leonardo Angiulo: U.S. Supreme Court Renews 2nd Amendment Debate
• Leonardo Angiulo: Freedom of Information in Action
• Leonardo Angiulo: Signing A Release - The Price of Admission
• Leonardo Angiulo: Using Contract Law To Spur Congressional Action
• Leonardo Angiulo: Keeping The Powerful From Abusing Our Money
• Leonardo Angiulo: Something To Be Proud Of On Independence Day
• Leonardo Angiulo: What’s Next For America’s Voting Rights Act

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Email to a friend Permalink