Aug. 4, 2003
The Sweet Sound of Money
By J. Barlow Herget
RALEIGH - It’s repeated so often that it’s a cliché when an elected official, usually with umbrage, declares that his or her vote cannot be purchased by a measly $4,000 or $400 or $40 campaign contribution. As President Nixon would say, "That would be wrong."
It would be wrong and even illegal -- can you say bribe? -- but a recent study by the Associated Press finds that votes often follow the money in Congress much like the piper plays the tune of them what pay him.
Unfortunately, the A.P. story made few front pages and scant mention on television news broadcasts or “shout shows”. (Please, isn’t there anyone who can save us from Laci Peterson or Kobe Bryant specials?)
The A.P. investigation deserves better.
Briefly, the investigation examined six major issues under consideration in the House of Representatives. They were: medical malpractice, class action lawsuits, overhauling bankruptcy laws, the energy bill, gun manufacturer lawsuits and overtime pay.
Legislation was adopted on five of the issues, and the A.P.’s study found that you could usually tell how your congressman would vote by looking at which special interest gave him or her the most money in the 2002 election cycle.
Special interests that contributed the most money apparently were also the most persuasive, based on voting results. For example, gun manufacturers and distributors contributed $1.2 million to House members in the 2002 Election. Their opponents scraped up only $27,250. Guess which side won?
The A.P. and the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics tracked special interest contributions to House members and then matched the money to the respective member’s votes. For example, U.S. Rep. Robin Hayes, R-NC, alone received $19,900 from gun interests. Hayes voted for their bill.
The A.P. figured that supporters of the legislation received on average $173 from gun interests for every $1 received by legislative opponents. House members who voted for the bankruptcy bill received $2.13 from credit card and finance industries for every $1 given to the bill’s opponents.
Similarly, labor unions opposed the bill on overtime pay. Congresspersons who voted against the legislation received contributions from labor unions at a rate that averaged $10.40 for every $1 given to bill supporters.
These stories only confirms what most Americans believe: that special interests control the corridors of power. Nobody should be surprised that the big special interests win the legislative battles.
What this study truly shows is that the battle over policy is not necessarily fought on Capitol Hill, as our civics textbooks tell us. Instead the battles lie in campaign season, when candidates who endear themselves to special interests are able to collect the big money from like-minded lobbyists and PACs, that candidates need to get to Washington in the first place.
North Carolina voters will not be shocked to learn that the same voting pattern often afflicts General Assembly members. Bob Hall with the nonprofit Democracy North Carolina organization in Carrboro has long tracked voting records and campaign contributions and finds that money talks. Loudly.
Two issues in the recent session of the legislature illustrate the connection between contributions and votes. The first is legislation approved by the General Assembly affecting government regulation over local phone rates.
The bill, adopted overwhelmingly by both houses, gives phone companies that provide local service more power to change rates and the Utilities Commission less authority to set rates. It also limits the Commission in considering company earnings when setting rates.
According to Amy Gardner of "The News & Observer" of Raleigh, the companies pushing for the changes were BellSouth, Verizon and Sprint. During the past two elections, these companies have contributed about $460,000 to legislative candidates.
Sometimes, it’s not about voting but rather, not voting.
The state Senate, for example, voted to ban video poker games this spring. There is sentiment in the House to do the same. The video poker crowd would just as soon not see the House take up the matter. The industry has been generous in campaign contributions, over $400,000 to legislative candidates in the past two elections. So far, the bill hasn’t come up for a vote.
Sadly, there is a long list of examples that demonstrate the connection between campaign contributions and legislative voting and government executives’ actions. Arianna Huffington, the wealthy and increasingly populist gadfly has written an entertaining book about some of these stories.
Tellingly, the title of her book is "Pigs at the Trough."
Barlow Herget is a writer and consultant who served two terms on the Raleigh City Council.
743 W. Johnson St.
Suite E
Raleigh, NC 27603
919.839.1200