The campaign finance compromise that passed Wednesday in the U.S.
Senate would only deepen economic and racial inequality in the United
States. The contribution-limits amendment to the McCain-Feingold bill
would increase the gap between the rich and the poor and between whites
and people of color by doubling individual contributions that can be
given directly to candidates--so-called "hard" money--from $1,000 to
$2,000.
The amendment, if it is allowed to stand in the final bill, would
adversely impact all Americans unable or unwilling to contribute large
sums of money to politicians or political parties.
Perhaps because the Senate does not look like America, the amendment
overlooks important perspectives related to inclusion, participation and
representation.
Some senators have asked: "Can we raise enough money?" Others have
asked: "Are we infringing on the 1st Amendment rights of the wealthy?"
Unfortunately, by pandering to the narrow interests of politicians and
those individuals who can make $1,000 contributions under the current
system--who make up less than 1% of the population--the amendment
overlooks the rights of all other Americans. In a privately funded
political system, those who make large contributions have special access
to politicians and to the leadership of political parties, and they
therefore determine to a much greater degree which candidates will be
able to run credible campaigns.
Under the amended McCain-Feingold bill, wealthy individuals would be
even more important, and the less wealthy would be even less important.
Politicians would give even less attention to less wealthy communities
because they have much greater potential for financial support elsewhere.
The contribution-limits amendment also has an adverse impact on people
of color. Due in part to past state-sponsored discrimination and to
intergenerational transfers of wealth, the net worth for white households
is eight times greater than that of African American households and 12
times greater than Latino households. These economic disparities have an
impact on the ability of people of color to make political contributions.
In a survey of individual contributors sponsored by the Joyce
Foundation, a philanthropic organization, 95% of respondents identified
themselves as white, and fewer than 1% identified themselves as people of
color. A separate study conducted by Public Campaign found that residents
in minority communities are about three times less likely to make
contributions than other Americans. The same study determined that the 41
million residents living in minority communities give less money than the
700,000 residents living in the highest-giving communities, which are
predominantly white.
These racial disparities in political contributions would only
increase under the amended McCain-Feingold bill.
Real campaign finance reform would meet the Fannie Lou Hamer standard,
which is named after the legendary African American voting rights
champion who worked on a Mississippi cotton plantation for most of her
life.
The Fannie Lou Hamer standard asks whether a proposed reform would
make the system more fair for someone like Hamer, a poor woman of color.
The now-amended McCain-Feingold bill woefully fails this standard. Just
like the poll tax, the larger contribution limits under the amended bill
only further shut out those in our society who are the most marginalized,
the most discounted and the most overlooked.
The contribution-limits amendment also violates the inclusive spirit
of one person, one vote as established by the Supreme Court. Higher
contribution limits would move us further away from a democratic promise
that includes all Americans, regardless of race or wealth.
As long as our democracy is based on money rather than our votes, our
government and laws will not reflect America's true diversity.
