Legal loopholes

Thirty years of campaign finance reforms do not seem to have had much effect on the influence of “special interest” money in the world of politics, and even less on the credibility of politicians themselves. By credibility we mean trust—an essential part in a democracy—that public officials will respond to something beyond their personal aspirations and at least dedicate part of their time to representing their constituents.

A case in point was recently revealed. California currently has strict limits on the amount of funds that a lawmaker can raise during an election from every person ($4,100), or contributions made to a politician’s committee per calendar year ($3,400). For state positions, the limits are higher—but in any case, they are strict. But there is a catch. What is known as a loophole, a hole that has revealed itself to be the size of the Grand Canyon: There is no limit on what politicians can raise when they establish a “committee,” not to work on behalf of the candidate or politician but for other election purposes, like for example, supporting a ballot measure.

Our California lawmakers have enthusiastically used these committees to raise the funds they are unable to receive directly; in the past two years, they have collected $2.7 million. In the majority of the cases, these committees were not used to provide funds for initiative campaigns—and at least $700,000 went to pay political consultants without it being clear if all the work had to do with initiatives. These funds were also used to organize events for yet more fundraising.

It is no coincidence that as the credibility of politicians weakens, voter apathy has been more or less a constant in this country’s various elections.