The Escalating and Detrimental Influence of Money in American Politics

Ad-tracking firm AdImpact Politics predicts 2024’s elections will be “the most expensive political cycle of all time." Dzhafarov Eduard/Shutterstock

As the amount of money being pumped into political campaigns escalates, so does the damaging impact it has on our politicians and their policies.

According to the latest projections obtained from GroupM and reported by Axios on Dec. 8, spending on political radio and television ads will reach $15.9 billion during the 2024 presidential election cycle and could exceed $17 billion if you include direct mail ad campaigns.

That’s an increase of 31.2 percent over the 2020 presidential election.

The Epoch Times recently reported that the 2024 presidential election cycle is predicted to be the most expensive in American history.

So far, the top three megadonors for four presidential hopefuls alone have contributed a combined total of more than $41 million to power the campaigns of their chosen candidates.

While he has yet to see a projection for possible spending in 2024, campaign finance expert Dan McMillan noted that the total spent on campaigns in 2016 was $7 billion, which doubled to $14.4 billion in 2020. So, spending in 2024 is “going to shatter previous records,” he said.

Mr. McMillan, a former prosecutor, campaign finance expert and founder of Save Democracy in America, said voters have made it very clear that they are opposed to the growing influence of money on America’s elections.

‘Hard for Good People to Run’

A survey released by Pew Research on Oct. 23, showed that 72 percent of Americans say “there should be limits on the amount of money individuals and organizations can spend on political campaigns,” and 58 percent say it’s possible to impose laws that would limit the influence of money in elections.

An overwhelming majority—85 percent—say the high cost of political campaigns “makes it hard for good people to run for office.”

A July survey conducted by Target Smart for Democracy America showed that the majority of New Hampshire’s voters are either very dissatisfied (71 percent) or somewhat dissatisfied (19 percent) with the current state of American politics.

The data suggest that the level of dissatisfaction is directly related to the “corrupting influence” of money. The majority of those surveyed said they are very concerned (65 percent) or somewhat concerned (27 percent) about the amount of money being spent in America’s elections.

In addition, the overwhelming majority said they are very concerned (71 percent) or somewhat concerned (21 percent) that big donors are the ones who are funding U.S. elections.

The survey also revealed that 90 percent of New Hampshire’s voters believe that big money makes a mockery of the American ideal that the government should be “by the people,” and 84 percent said politicians ignore America’s voters and “listen only to the big donors who fund their campaigns.”

A study authored by Mohammed Saaida and released in November by Research Gate, “The Influence of Money in Politics,” affirmed the controlling influence that the wealthy can have on politicians and policies.

“The concentration of wealth has significant implications for the political system,” he wrote, explaining that rich individuals and corporations can use their wealth to influence the political process, choose political candidates, fund their campaigns, and lobby for policies that suit their interests.

Campaign finance expert Dan McMillan, former prosecutor and founder of Save Democracy in America. Courtesy of Dan McMillan

“When the interests of the wealthy few are prioritized over the needs of the majority, the result is a system that perpetuates inequality and fails to address pressing social issues,” he wrote.

“When a small group of wealthy individuals or corporations can shape the political landscape to serve their interests, the principles of equal representation and fair governance are compromised.”

One of the biggest takeaways that Mr. McMillan said he hopes that people get from past election cycles as they head into 2024 is that the cost of campaigns has “literally skyrocketed over the last ten years.”

“This means that the damage done by money to our political system and the way it disenfranchises the voters has also ballooned,” he said.

While many have been aware for years of the growing influence of campaign money, it’s “now a far bigger problem.”

“I had a eureka moment about this earlier this year,” he said. “Even people who work in politics and study politics have underestimated the damage that money does because most of the damage is not the obvious influence peddling.”

“The bulk of the damage is invisible,” he said. “Because it’s based on good ideas that we don’t hear about and on the potential candidates who never run because they couldn’t attract enough support to get a campaign off the ground.”

While candidates with good ideas who can’t find donors with deep pockets fade into obscurity, Mr. McMillan said, candidates who do manage to secure financial backing “clearly self-sensor preemptively to avoid alienating a potential donor.”

In effect, he said it’s the donors who “choose the candidates we are allowed to vote for and they limit what policies the candidates are allowed to fight for and implement if they make it into office.”

Once a politician gets to Washington, he said, they are so dependent on those donors to keep sending them money to run for reelection that they fail to address the country’s problems out of fear of “alienating this or that donor.”

“It’s brought us to a point where our government hits a new milestone of dysfunction almost every week,” he said, recalling how “we came close to defaulting on the national debt.”

“We’re running a $2 trillion deficit and no one in either party is even talking about an idea of how we’re supposed to balance the budget,” he said.

“The need to please the donor has paralyzed candidates in both parties,” he added. Rather than offer positive solutions, candidates attack their challengers to “rile up their base and cash in on small-dollar donations.”

Attack Ads

Mr. McMillan also noted how political campaigns have strayed from being about how candidates would improve Americans’ lives and have devolved into efforts to destroy their opponents with smear campaigns.

Never Back Down, a Super PAC supporting Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), launched a brutal attack ad against former President Donald Trump, accusing him of mimicking Democrats’ tactics.

Another Never Back Down attack ad uses an AI-generated voice of President Trump attacking Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R).

In a June 5 post on X, formerly Twitter, the DeSantis War Room launched an attack ad against President Trump using AI-generated images of him hugging and kissing Dr. Anthony Fauci, saying, “Donald Trump became a household name by FIRING countless people *on television* But when it came to Fauci...”

A Super PAC backing President Trump, the MAGA War Room, released an ad attacking Mr. DeSantis for his alleged votes to cut Social Security and Medicare and to raise the retirement age to 70 when he served as a U.S. congressman.

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) put out an ad attacking both former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) and Mr. DeSantis for not attacking President Trump.

As part of her own effort to prevent President Trump from getting a second term in the White House, former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) put out her own political attack ad against him.