Chapter 18 Lesson 3
Chapter 18 Lesson 3
Television
The most important communication tool for a presidential candidate is
television. Watching television is the main way that many citizens find out about
a candidate and his or her position on issues. Appearances on television news
shows are vitally important for campaigns in order to remain in the public
consciousness, and campaigns will routinely stage newsworthy events with their
candidates in order to get favorable airtime. Televised debates, often occurring
late in a campaign, can have an impact on undecided voters.
You can tell whether an ad was produced by a campaign or by a supporting
group by whether or not the candidate being supported states during the
advertisement that he or she approves of the message. This is a requirement of
the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, written with the idea that fewer
negative ads would be created if candidates had to actively affirm the language
in their advertisements.
Television
Just in time for the 2012
presidential election, an election
watchdog group developed a cell
phone application that allows a
user to point his or her phone at
the television and then be
automatically linked to a
database containing information
about the group sponsoring the
ad.
Campaign Finance
Running for political office is
very expensive. In the 2011
2012 election cycle,
presidential and congressional
candidates spent more than
$7 billion on election
campaigns. Candidates need
money for office space, staff
salaries, travel, and
advertising, among other
things. In addition to
candidate spending, unions,
corporations, and other
groups spend huge sums of
money to independently
advertise on behalf of the
candidates and issues that
they support.
Campaign Finance
Efforts to regulate money in campaigns are controversial. Those favoring
strict regulation believe unlimited spending can have a corrupting
influence on politics and gives an unfair advantage to those with a lot of
money. They argue that, once elected, candidates will feel the need to give
favors to those who contributed heavily to their campaign.
When a candidate seems to be motivated by specific monetary interests
rather than by the good of the country as a whole, people accuse that
candidate of corruption. Opponents of regulation believe money
contributes to a broader political debate. They argue that giving and
spending money in elections is a form of speech and thus protected by the
First Amendment.
Public Financing
Federal funding for presidential elections was
established as part of a 1974 amendment of
the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA).
Candidates that qualify can receive campaign
funds from the federal government if they
promise to limit the amount their campaigns
spend to a specific amount.
Barack Obama elected not to receive public
financing while Republican nominee John
McCain chose to receive it. As a result, Obama
was able to outspend McCain by a factor of
two to one. In 2012, neither presidential
candidate used public funding
Direct Funding
Direct contributions are called hard money
and are limited based on regulations set out in
FECA and its amendments. As of 2012,
individual supporters can donate $2,500 to a
presidential candidate; national and local
party committees can give $5,000. Political
action committees (PACs), which are groups
established by interest groups to raise money
to support candidates or parties, can donate
$2,500.
Individuals are capped at donating $117,000
on political campaigns every two years
Indirect Funding
Indirect funding includes contributions to issue groups and
political organizations that are independent from and not
coordinating with a campaign. In the past, money given to
these organizations was often funneled to national parties
and used to advertise for candidates, hold voter
registration drives, or stage get-out-the-vote campaigns. In
2002, Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold sponsored a
bill to rein in this spending. The Bipartisan Campaign
Reform Act (BCRA) banned these soft money transactions.
In 2010 the Supreme Court struck down these advertising
limits in Citizens United v. FEC. Due to this and several other
legal decisions, PACs that do not coordinate with campaigns
can receive unlimited donations from individuals,
corporations, unions, and other groups. PACs that take
advantage of this new freedom are now commonly referred
to as SuperPACs. These powerful SuperPACs collect and
spend unlimited amounts of money to support or defeat a
candidate.