Voting and Elections PDF

**Lesson 5: Voting and Elections** Introduction There are more elections to fill more offices in the US than in any other country. We have an estimated 521,000 elective offices. We elect everyone from dog catcher to President. In Europe people usually vote for a national legislator and a few local...

**Lesson 5: Voting and Elections** Introduction There are more elections to fill more offices in the US than in any other country. We have an estimated 521,000 elective offices. We elect everyone from dog catcher to President. In Europe people usually vote for a national legislator and a few local officials. *In America, even the dogcatcher may be elected* Not only do we have a tremendous number of elected offices, but we also have primary elections. In no other democracy does the rank and file select candidates in primaries. The United States also has referenda, bond issues, and recalls. Some states even have recall elections, which allow voters to recall an elected official during the middle of their term. A recall election in California opened the door for Arnold Schwarzenegger to become Governor. Many states also routinely throw major policy decisions to the voters to decide. Not only do we have a tremendous number of elections, but we have a tremendous number of voters as well. Over 230 million Americans were eligible to vote in 2016, and over 138 million reported that they voted. Yet the idea that everyone could or should vote was a radical one in 1787. Virginia even required the ownership of 25 acres of settled land or 500 acres of unsettled land to vote. By 1824, states had eliminated property requirements in order to vote. But the vote was still confined to free white males. The franchise would be expanded by the 15^th^ and 19^th^ Amendments, permitting all men and then all women over the age of 21 to vote. It would be further expanded in 1971 with the 26^th^ amendment allowing 18 year olds the right to vote. **Lesson 5 Part 1: An Analytical Examination** ============================================== Role of Voting and Elections ---------------------------- What can the act of voting and the institution of elections accomplish? 1. 2. 3. - 4. - Such a powerful and influential mechanism places a burden on the citizen to be informed, to care about elections, and to have some idea about how government operates. If officials are supposed to represent the public's wishes, what are the leaders representing if voters aren't aware of the issues and knowledgeable? What does an election mean if voters are uninformed and unsophisticated? Democratic Theory ----------------- Democratic theory assumes that voters are responsive, intelligent, and informed. What is the fate of democracy if voters don't meet these criteria? Certainly you should not expect every citizen to meet such stringent criteria, but perhaps we should expect the voter to meet a few standards. Voters should be - - - - Some of these conditions should be met to satisfy democratic theory. And do not forget, democracy is more than process. Holding elections is easy. Dictators hold elections, and quite often they do have popular support. Democracy requires that principles, such as minority rights, must be respected. Even a popularly elected leader cannot deny the freedoms of those who disagree with him. Democracy is not just majority rule, but it is also minority rights. **Lesson 5 Part 2: Who Can Vote** ================================= Who Can Vote? ------------- Eligibility and Voter Registration ---------------------------------- Not only does the United States have an unusual number of elections, but we have a large number of eligible voters as well. In 2016, over 230 million Americans were eligible to vote. That number is about twenty million lower than the total population over the age of 18. Non-citizens are not eligible to vote. Many states deny the right to vote to those who have been previously convicted of a felony, and most states deny the right to vote to those serving in prison for a felony. 2016 also saw a record-breaking 200 million registered to vote. Many other democracies automatically register their citizens to vote. Not so in the US, where voting is a two-step process. First, a prospective voter must get registered, usually several weeks before an election. Oftentimes in election years, one encounters registration drives on college campuses or at the local shopping center; but failing that, the prospective voter needs to make a trip to the local Board of Elections. Registration also varies from state to state. Arizona has online registration, while North Dakota has no registration. The number of days a voter must be registered before an election also varies by state. The residency requirement means that a person has to live in a state for a specific length of time before they are allowed to register to vote. Simply moving to a new state is not enough. Historically this has varied from as little as three months to as long as two years. Some states also require that you have never been convicted of trying to bribe a public official or that you are not confined to a mental institution. But again, this varies by state. While there are certain constitutional guarantees (the right to vote cannot be denied based on race or gender, for example), states do have different eligibility standards and procedures for elections. Instead of one national election every four years, we really have 50 different state contests. The ballots themselves are different and printed by the states, and the states set different requirements to get on the ballot. Green Party candidate Jill Stein failed to get on the ballot in six states in 2016, including North Carolina, which has some of the toughest obstacles for third party candidates. Residency requirements also vary from state to state. Additionally, states have restricted the right to vote in other ways. Following the Civil War, states in the former Confederacy understood that with the 15^th^ Amendment, they could not deny the right to vote based on race, but they could use other mechanisms, such as poll taxes and literacy tests, to achieve the same effect. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 removed most of these restrictions that still remained. Voter Identification Laws ------------------------- The law they passed in 1964 was the Civil Rights Act, with the long title, "An act to enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States of America to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to authorize the Attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes. " Today, the argument centers around whether states may require a photo ID to vote. As of the end of 2016, 31 states required some form of identification, and sixteen of those demanded a photo identification, usually in the form of a driver's license or some other type of state issued identification. See [https://ballotpedia.org/Voter\_identification\_laws\_by\_state](https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_identification_laws_by_state%20)  for more information. In 2013, North Carolina passed one of the most restrictive voter ID laws in the nation. It passed soon after the Supreme Court in *Shelby v. Holder* struck down a provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that required states with a history of past discrimination, such as North Carolina, to get any changes to their voting laws approved by the federal government. The new law shortened early voting, eliminating a Sunday popular with African American churches and "Souls to the Polls" drives, removed the possibility of 16 and 17 year olds pre-registering in school, ended same day registration and out of precinct voting, and required a state-issued photo identification to vote, excluding university IDs and public assistance cards. Republican sponsors of the bill claimed that it was intended to prevent voter fraud, although a report by the state Board of Elections referred only two cases of in-person voter fraud to a district attorney from 2000 to 2012 out of some 40 million votes cast. Nation-wide, only four cases of in-person voter fraud have been identified from the 2016 presidential election. On July 29, 2016 the US Court of Appeals for the 4^th^ Circuit struck down the law, asserting that state legislators had targeted "African Americans with almost surgical precision." Republican staffers in the General Assembly had sought out information, specifically on turnout by race (election day vs. early voting) and by race of registered voters without a driver's license. The Supreme Court refused to reverse the lower court ruling (by a 4-4 vote.) The 2016 presidential election in North Carolina was conducted without voter IDs, although the number of early voting opportunities was shortened. Other states do continue to require a photo ID, and some states require no identification on election day. In our federalist system, the right to vote is defined in fifty different ways. But we must ask the bigger question about the right to vote and democracy: Are barriers to voting there to protect our democracy, or do they ultimately lessen our democracy? The most important thing, in any democracy, is that everyone wakes up the day after the election and acknowledges that the election was conducted freely and fairly and agrees to abide by the results. Failing that, democracy itself fails. **Lesson 5 Part 3: How Campaigns are Organized and Run** ======================================================== How Campaigns are Organized and Run ----------------------------------- Given that elections are so crucial to any democracy and that they play such a large part in our democracy, we need to examine how campaigns are organized and run. We can imagine ourselves as the candidate or the campaign manager. Here's Mary Matalin and James Carville, two of the best in the business.  They dated during the 1992 Presidential campaign when she was advising President Bush and he was working for then Governor Bill Clinton. They later married and had children and now routinely appear on the talk shows, debating one another. How the Candidate Structures the Campaign ----------------------------------------- There are several questions that anyone who runs a campaign must answer: - - - - - - - - **Lesson 5 Part 4: What Type of Election is It?** ================================================= What Type of Election Is It? ---------------------------- The most fundamental question that any candidate must answer is, what office they are seeking? Obviously strategies differ depending on whether you are running for President or county commissioner. Presidential Elections ---------------------- Of those 521,000 elective offices, only two, the President and Vice-President, are elected at the national level. The rest of our elections are for state and local offices. And presidential campaigns are extraordinary. They require an enormous amount of time, effort, and money. Candidates now start their presidential campaigns years before the actual election and spend hundreds of millions of dollars. Walter Mondale, the Democratic nominee in 1984, said a person needs "fire in the belly." He also said of his 1984 bid, "For four years, that's all I did. That's all you think about. That's all you talk about.... That's your leisure. That's your luxury.... I told someone, the question is not whether I can be elected; the question is whether I can be elected and not be nuts when I get there." In fact, during the early days of the US it was thought to be rather unseemly for presidential candidates to actively seek votes. Instead, a candidate simply sent a message to his party convention accepting the nomination and stayed at home and let others do the campaigning for him. In 1860, Stephen Douglas became the first presidential candidate to break with tradition, arguing that the preservation of the union necessitated a breach in decorum. He mounted a major campaign tour with speeches. The next campaigning on a large scale did not appear until William Jennings Bryan's whistle stop tour in 1896. While the campaigns of the 1880s were frenzied, with lots of rallies, stump speeches, and campaign literature, the campaign was run by the party, not the candidates. Gradually, it became common for candidates, especially Democrats, to actively seek votes and give some indication of what policies they favored. Yet as late as 1920, Warren G. Harding conducted most of his campaign from his front porch in Marion, Ohio. Today, of course, presidential candidates not only actively seek votes but pander for them. It has been joked that running for president requires a photogenic marathon runner. Running for president is a grueling, demanding process. Primaries and General Elections ------------------------------- There are, of course, different strategies based on whether it is a primary or general election. A primary is like a mini-election. Members of the party (generally) choose among all the candidates from their party for an office who will be the official party nominee. Let's say three Republicans are candidates for sheriff. In the primary, Republicans will choose one to be their candidate for the general election. Consider the primaries for President in 2016. Neither party had an incumbent to nominate. Many sought the nomination of their party, but Republicans only ran against Republicans and Democrats only competed against fellow Democrats. As a general rule, Republicans are more conservative than the public at large and, therefore, all the Republican candidates will sound more conservative in the primaries. As a general rule, Democrats are more liberal, so the Democratic candidates will sound more liberal in the primaries. After a candidate captures the nomination of their party, however, they all run to the moderate middle, where most Americans reside. *Three Types of Primaries* -------------------------- ### **Closed Primary** Used by most states, including North Carolina; voters must declare party affiliation either at registration or election day. ### **Open Primary** The voter may select a party primary of their choice in the privacy of voting booth, without declaring party affiliation. ### **Blanket Primary** Rarely used, it allows a voter to switch back and forth between parties on the same ballot. For example, a voter could cast a ballot in the Republican primary for president, but choose to vote for a Democrat in the senatorial primary. Caucus States ------------- Some states are caucus states. A caucus is the older form of party candidate selection, another kind of mini-election. In the past party leaders simply talked and made deals as to who would be the party's official candidate. Today it is a much different process. These meetings take place at a large gathering with multiple rounds of voting to narrow, round by round, the number of candidates. In a caucus state, both parties hold caucuses in multiple locations in the state on the same night. Iowa is important because it is the first contest in every presidential election year. **Lesson 5 Part 5: Goals** ========================== Goals ----- What is the goal of your campaign? Winning seems obvious, but there can be other goals as well. On the local level, someone might see putting their name on the ballot as free advertising for their small business. Others may want to create name recognition for future elections. Some candidates are motivated by bringing in new voters into the process. Others want to highlight a particular issue or cause. A few candidates run for bargaining purposes hoping to get enough delegates to impact the convention. **Lesson 5 Part 6: Information** ================================ Information ----------- Several others kinds of information also affect the campaign. Mood of the Electorate ---------------------- What is the country concerned about? Every campaign needs a theme. It must be simple, persuasive, and easily communicated. Look at Ronald Reagan's "Its Morning Again in America." Reagan was playing to the upbeat mood in the country, just as Barack Obama in 2008 spoke about "Change We Can Believe In." Donald Trump won in 2016 promising to "Make America Great Again" (or as he said on twitter, \#MAGA). Likely Turnout -------------- What is the likely turnout? Usually a large turnout helps the Democrats, although not always, as was seen in 2004. That year had a nearly 60% turnout, but still saw Republican George W. Bush defeat the Democratic nominee John Kerry. Because Democrats generally have lower SES, a large turnout means more lower-SES voters who are Democrats. This is another reason why Democrats often struggle in mid-term elections, with lower turnout. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Opposition and Yourself ------------------------------------------------------- A candidate must understand his or her strengths and weaknesses and the strengths and weaknesses of their opponent. Will they run a positive campaign around their strengths or target their opponent's weaknesses? For example, in 1996, Republican Bob Dole faced a candidate that many thought he should attack for his perceived lack of integrity---Bill Clinton. Dole refused to and insisted on running a campaign about his strengths. (His campaign theme was, "A Better Man for a Better America.") Some criticized former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016 for running a campaign that was almost entirely negative, anti-Trump, without offering a positive image of her own. In 1964, Conservative Republican candidate Barry Goldwater ran on the campaign slogan, "In your heart, you know he's right." The Democrats were able to turn this slogan into fears over his political positions: "In your heart, you know he's right...far right." Issues ------ Issues are not neutral. They can help or hurt a particular candidate. For instance, in 2004, voters perceived George W. Bush as the stronger candidate on fighting terrorism and national defense. John Kerry was seen as stronger on health care and the economy. The success of each candidate would depend on who was to make their issue the voters' number one priority. In 2008, in the midst of an economic crisis, Barack Obama was seen as the best candidate to shake up Washington, DC. In 2016, Donald Trump emphasized his outsider credentials. Impact of the Issues -------------------- Do people vote based on the issues or are there other considerations? In 1984, poll after poll found that voters agreed with Walter Mondale on the issues, but he lost in a landslide... How Do the Voters Perceive Me? Enthusiasm or Apathy? ---------------------------------------------------- Mondale lost because Americans *loved* his opponent, Ronald Reagan. In 2004, although many voters were ambivalent about George W. Bush, Democratic challenger John Kerry was unable to generate a lot of excitement. By contrast, think about Eisenhower's slogan, "I Like Ike." However, in 2016, neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump was widely popular. **Lesson 5 Part 7: Strategies and Tactics** =========================================== Strategies and Tactics ---------------------- Non-voter Strategies -------------------- Non-voter strategies are aimed at: - - - - Voter Strategies ---------------- ### **The nature of the electoral system makes a difference.** First of all, is gerrymandering present? Gerrymandering is drawing district lines for partisan political advantage. The practice is named after Elbridge Gerry, a former Governor of Massachusetts, who had a district drawn that looked like a salamander. ("Gerry" plus "salamander" = "gerrymander.") Here's the original cartoon: Today, there are two types of gerrymandering, packing and cracking. Packing is drawing lines to include as many of one parties' supporters as possible, while cracking is splitting a party's support between two districts to minimize its power. Legislative district lines are redrawn every ten years after the census by the states. A candidate must also understand how the elections laws are written. The impact of a vote depends on the electoral system. In the United States we use, mostly, single member districts; that is, one person is elected from a single district. And we use first-past-the-post, a majoritarian criteria for determining who is the winner. It simply means whoever gets the most votes wins. They do not necessarily need to win at least 50% of the vote, simply more votes than any other candidate. Let's imagine we have four candidates, Bri, Jed, Luis and Angie. Bri wins 40%, Jed wins 30%, Luis wins 20% and Angie wins 10%. Bri is the winner of the election because she received more votes than any other candidate, although she did not receive 50% of the vote. Some states do require that any winner receive at least 50% of the vote. If no one does, there will be a second, additional election, a run-off between the two candidates who won the highest vote totals. In this case, the two who would face each other would be Bri and Jed. Either way, this kind of electoral system tends to result in two-party systems. When you vote, do you always vote for your preferred candidate, or for your preferred candidate who has a chance of winning? If you only have one vote, you might be careful to "spend" it on someone who has a chance of winning and which also allows the person you really don't agree with to win office. But some note that while Bri won 40% of the vote, in the first election, 60% of the vote went to other candidates. An alternative electoral system is a multi-member or proportional system. In this case, let's imagine we have a district which elects two members. Thus each voter has two votes; they can vote for two different candidates. If we go back to our same list of candidates and how much of the vote they received, now the district has elected both Bri and Jed, who together received 70% of the votes. Multi-member is more broadly representative and allows for people to support candidates from more than one party, potentially. It also tends to create a multi-party system. Just how multiparty depends on thresholds for election and the political culture. A country that is very divided in many directions may see those divisions reflected in multiple parties' candidates winning elections. ### **Are you running as a Democrat, Republican, or Independent?** What difference does that make? Isn't a good strategy a good strategy, regardless of party? Is there a tendency for different groups to support one party over another? After looking at this information, what groups tend to vote Democratic? What groups vote Republican? Notice how diverse the Democratic coalition is. When Jesse Jackson called it the "Rainbow Coalition," he wasn't kidding. Republicans, as a minority party, must follow a slightly different strategy. They tend to downplay group and party appeals because, if they mobilized voters on this basis, they would still lose because there are fewer Republicans. Instead, Republicans stress their individual characteristics and ask voters to vote for the person and not the party, and they try to put together some issues that will cut into the Democratic coalition. Additionally, Republicans have been more loyal and consistent over the years. ### **Are you running as an incumbent or as a challenger?** Incumbents are usually enormously successful in getting re-elected. On average, over 90% of House incumbents seeking re-election win. In 2016, 97% of House incumbents running for re-election won. Of course, incumbents who **know** they are going to lose often retire. In the Senate, where challengers are more likely to be well-known and well-financed, over 87% of incumbents still got re-elected. In 2010, incumbent Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) won an unlikely write-in campaign after losing the primary. What kinds of advantages do incumbents have? Members of Congress enjoy free mailing privileges, commonly called the franking privilege. Members use these newsletters to inform and educate their constituents. Incumbents also have greater name recognition. They get more news coverage. They find it easier to raise money. All of these factors lead to re-election. ### **Are you running in a presidential or non-presidential election year?** Is there a coattail effect? That is, the better the man at the top of the ticket runs, the more likely others of his party will win, or ride his coattails into office. During a Presidential election year, Congressional candidates will link themselves to a popular presidential candidate. Voters will often respond with a straight ticket, or at the very least, reason that their presidential candidate needs members of his party in Congress to be effective. However, in nearly every off-year election, the president's party will lose seats in Congress. In the past century, this has happened every time but three. The exceptions are 1934, 1998, and 2002. In 1934, the country was coping with the Great Depression and responding to President Roosevelt's call for a New Deal. In 2002, George Bush was riding a wave of patriotism after the 9/11 attacks. In 1998, less than two months after President Clinton admitted to an affair with a White House intern, voters elected more Democrats to Congress, against all predictions. **Lesson 5 Part 8: Costs** ========================== Costs ----- In 2008, for the first time, over a billion dollars was spent on the presidential race, with Barack Obama spending over \$700 million. The congressional campaigns in 2010 also topped \$1 billion for the first time. The most expensive race was in Connecticut, for the US Senate, where the WWF's Linda McMahon spent over \$50 million out of her own pocket in a losing effort. That is unusual, however, as usually the candidate who spends the most wins. Politicians are sometimes accused of buying votes. John Kennedy, who was noted for his wit, diffused this charge by claiming he received a telegram from his multimillionaire father complaining, "Don't buy one more vote than necessary. I'll be damned if I'll pay for a landslide!" History of Campaign Spending ---------------------------- Yet, complaints about outrageous campaign spending are not new. In 1757, George Washington was criticized for spending too much on his campaign for the Virginia House of Burgesses. To the voters in his district, the Father of Our Country passed out 50 gallons of rum punch, 46 gallons of beer, 34 gallons of win, and 2 gallons of cider royal. There were only 391 voters in the district. That averages out to a quart and a half of liquor per voter. In the nation's first hundred years or so, campaigns were not very expensive. With the expansion of media, however, costs grew. It is largely the expenses of television that has driven skyrocketing costs. Until the 1970s campaign expenses were governed by the 1925 Corrupt Practices Act, which set maximum spending limits of \$25,000 for Senate campaigns and \$10,000 for House campaigns. The law was largely ignored. As President Lyndon Johnson observed, the system was "more loophole than law." From 1860--1972, of 29 Presidential campaigns, the man who spent the most money won 22 out of 29 times. The exceptions were FDR's four victories, and the wins for Wilson, Kennedy, and Johnson. Nixon's 1972 campaign, the last before federal funding, cost \$65,000,000, some of which was obtained illegally. Nixon told his friend, Clement Stone, who gave his campaign \$2,000,000, "Clem, you and I both know that I wouldn't be here if it weren't for you." Dairy interests contributed half a million dollars to the Nixon campaign in 1972, and the Department of Agriculture began raising price supports for milk shortly after the contributions began. After ITT picked up a bill for \$400,000 to help pay for the Republican convention, Nixon officials pressured the Justice Department to drop a lawsuit against ITT. Nixon's campaign committee was appropriately called the Committee to Re-Elect the President (spelled "CREP" but referred to as "CREEP"). In 1996, political provocateur Michael Moore wanted to find out just how far politicians would go in accepting campaign donations. To President Clinton's re-election campaign he sent a \$100 check from a group called "Hemp Growers of America." Not only did they accept the money, but they sent two thank-you notes to the organization. Pat Buchanan's campaign accepted a \$100 check from "Abortionists for Buchanan" and a \$75 check from "The John Wayne Gacy Fan Club." (Buchanan is a staunch pro-life advocate. John Wayne Gacy was an infamous serial killer of young men.) Bob Dole's campaign, however, returned two checks from "Satan Worshipers for Dole." Ross Perot's campaign refused to accept a \$100 check from a group called "Pedophiles for Free Trade," although the check was returned "with a very nice letter wishing me well and the people in my group well..." Federal Elections Campaign Act ------------------------------ Even before this incredibly corrupt and expensive campaign, it was clear something had to be done. Congress passed the first edition of the **Federal Elections Campaign Act** (FECA) in 1971 and updated the law in 1974. The 1971 edition of the law requires that candidates file detailed and timely reports on who was financing their campaign and how much they were spending. All of this information is available to the public. The 1974 edition established the first spending limit for presidential candidates and provided for public funding. Some contribution limits were also established. An individual could contribute no more than \$1,000 to a candidate in any given election. That has since been increased to \$2,500. An individual could give no more than \$5,000 to a political action committee (PAC), and no PAC may give more than \$5,000 to a candidate. Corporate giving was illegal before 1974, but happened all the time. This law was a way to open up the process and regulate it by allowing corporations to form PACs. Federal Funding for Elections ----------------------------- To qualify for federal funding, a presidential candidate must receive \$5,000 from each of 20 states, with no single contribution over \$250. Once these provisions are met, federal funds are made available covering 50% of expenditures in the primaries up to proscribed limits, which is set in 1972 dollars at \$10 million. In 2008, the total for the primaries was \$42.05 million and \$84.1 million for the general election. There are limits set for each state as well, based on population. However, smart candidates know that they must do well in the nation's first primary, in New Hampshire. Notice the low limit set on spending in New Hampshire. How do they get around these low limits? They advertise on Boston TV stations, which everyone in New Hampshire watches. Those expenditures would be counted against their spending in Massachusetts, not New Hampshire. Other campaign expenses could be shifted to Vermont, Maine, or Connecticut. Also, candidates who fail to get at least 10% of the vote in two consecutive primaries lose their eligibility until they get 20% in another primary. The Democratic and Republican parties also receive money for the convention. ### **Refusing Federal Money** From 1976 until 2000, every candidate running for President, save independent billionaire Ross Perot in 1992, decided to take the federal matching funds. In 2000, George Bush, believing he could raise far more money than the limits allowed, refused the federal money in the primaries. Four years later, Bush and Democrats Howard Dean and John Kerry all opted out of the matching money system in the primaries. In 2008, John McCain, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton refused federal money in the primaries, and Obama became the first candidate to refuse federal money in the general election as well. In 2012, no serious presidential candidate accepted federal money with the limits they entailed. The Romney and Obama teams collectively spent over 2.3 billion dollars. ### **Third Party Candidates** Candidates who don't belong to a major party who get at least 5% of the vote in the election can get money in proportion to the percentage of the vote that they receive. Ross Perot's 19% of the vote in 1992 would have entitled him to federal money after the election and for the next election. He decided not to take it that year, but opted to take the money in 1996. Citizens United --------------- Additionally, in 2010, in a 5--4 decision in Citizens United vs. Federal Elections Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations may independently fund political broadcasts. The court ruled that this was protected under the first amendment. However, they may still be prohibited from giving directly to campaigns. Personal Spending ----------------- If a candidate accepts federal funding, there is a limit of \$50,000 from immediate personal and family funds for primaries and another \$50,000 for general election. However, there is no limit on personal money spent **before** declaring candidacy. In 1976, the Supreme Court opened up a large loophole in the campaign finance laws. In *Buckley v. Valeo (1976), *the Court struck down limits that candidates could spend on their own behalf, if they did not accept federal money. Political Action Committees --------------------------- They also struck down limits that groups or individuals could spend independently if they had no connection with the candidate. The only way the government can constitutionally limit what candidates spend is if they accept federal money. No FEC funds, no limits. Also, independent groups have found out that by paying for their own commercials rather than contributing directly to the candidate, they have more control over the discourse of the campaign. The 2004 Presidential campaign saw an explosion of these 527 groups, in part because of the passage of the 2002 McCain-Feingold Bill. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, as it is formally known, banned soft money. Soft money permitted a party to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on all of its candidates, including the president, without being subject to contribution limits. As long as the candidate's name is not particularly mentioned, the party could purchase campaign paraphernalia for candidates, finance registration, and get-out-the-vote activities, operate phone banks, and distribute campaign literature, bumper stickers, building funds, and computers. Over half a billion dollars in soft money was spent in the 1999--2000 election year cycle. Congress feared that this money would make parties and politicians beholden to special interests, so they eliminated it. However, groups and individuals with money still want to influence the process, so the 527 groups have grown. **Lesson 5 Part 9: Interpretation of the Vote** =============================================== Interpretation of the Vote -------------------------- The belief that elections carry a meaning is widely shared in democracies. Can we say that elections are mandates? The day after the election a victorious candidate must determine *why* they have won. This is true, not only if they hope to win re-election, but if they hope to be successful governing. What issue was important to voters? Why did they choose candidate A over candidate B? ***QUIZ*** 1. In the Congressional elections of 2026, who will pick up seats in Congress, if Democrats win the White House in 2024, if historical trends continue? **Republicans** 2. Drawing district lines for partisan political advantage is: gerrymandering 3.  In the 2024 Republican presidential primaries, the candidates will sound **more conservative** than in the November election. 4. IN this type of primary you must be registered with the party ahead of time: **closed** 5. Voter fraud across the United States is: **a rare occurrence** 6. The US has **more** elected offices than other democracies.  7. In presidential elections, ballots are printed **by the states** 8. The coattail effect is: **the more popular the presidential candidate, the more likely others of his/her party will win** 9. This web site has detailed reports on campiagn contributions: **opensecrets.org** 10. The residency requirments to vote in federal elections are determined by: **the states individually**