The
politics of money
Media coverage magnifies
the power of campaign cash
By Norman Solomon
WHILE PRESIDENT GEORGE W. Bush's reelection campaign accumulates
an unprecedented pile of dollars, the country's news media are deep
in a rut of reporting about the race for the Democratic presidential
nomination. With the next national Election Day scarcely 15 months away,
most signs point to a new triumph for the politics of money.
Rather than focusing on the positions being taken by Democrats seeking
their party's nomination for president, the media spotlight often stays
on the amounts of money that those contenders have raised as
if the importance and validity of a campaign can be gauged by the size
of its bank account.
A recent CNN interview with one of the longest-shot candidates, Al
Sharpton, was a painful indication of how extreme the media fixation
on campaign coffers has become.
"We know that the fundraising reports for the first half of the
year, these reports to the Federal Election Commission, are coming in,"
anchor Judy Woodruff said. "Howard Dean appears to be at least
on top in the second quarter; $7.5 million he raised. And we're told
that in one day alone, at the end of the quarter, he raised $800,000,
one day alone. Reverend Sharpton, in the entire quarter, so far it's
been reported that you raised $80,000, about a 10th of that what he
raised in one day. My question to you is, are you even serious about
raising money in this campaign?"
During his response, Sharpton was clear: "We've reduced American
politics too much to fundraising. Yes, I think money is important. But
I think that you judge races based on who can bring people to the polls....
I think that when we start acting as if money alone determines democracy,
that we're undermining the principles of a people's democracy."
Unwittingly, Woodruff came up with a retort that was even more damning
of the prevalent media mind-set. "I understand what you're saying
about it shouldn't be based on money alone," she replied. "But,
Reverend Sharpton, at this early stage, money is clearly one serious
indicator, measure, of where these candidates stand."
To political reporters, the truly credible candidates stand on mountains
of money. Like Woodruff, most journalists assume that we shouldn't take
a campaign seriously unless it has serious money behind it a
self-fulfilling attitude that simply postures as realism.
Meanwhile, in politics, after years of ballyhoo about campaign finance
reform and the banning of soft money, the power of bucks is greater
than ever. While turning off with great fanfare the prodigious
spigots of soft money, the recent McCain-Feingold law has boosted the
importance of direct hard money." An individual can now give $2,000
to a campaign, twice the previous limit.
"Political observers believe Bush's network of fundraisers, along
with campaign-finance rule changes that work strongly in Bush's favor,
will likely allow the president to overwhelm any Democratic opponent
with an unchallenged flurry of spending," the ABC News Web site
notes. And: "Some expect the Bush campaign may raise a record $200
million, largely through individual 'hard money' donations, before the
election is through." That would be about double what the Bush
campaign raised for the 2000 election.
Journalists should focus a great deal of attention on political fundraising.
But the usual reportage does little to expose the power of money in
politics. News stories routinely tote up the dollars without explaining
which financial interests are writing the checks, what those interests
stand to gain, and whether the candidates already have a record of serving
them.
And often the coverage has the effect of magnifying the power of money
by equating financial accumulation with legitimacy. As a campaign unfolds,
when the press hypes candidates because they're "first tier"
in fundraising, it's part of a pernicious cycle: Reporters tout the
candidates who've raised millions of dollars, and the media hype causes
more checks to be written for those candidates, who then are taken all
the more seriously by news media because they keep raising millions
...
Of course, few low-income people write four-figure or three-figure
donation checks. And Election Day comes long after the money primary
has winnowed out the presidential field of contenders. The campaign
finance system may have been "reformed" but it remains
deformed.
Norman Solomon is coauthor of Target Iraq: What the News Media Didn't
Tell You. For an excerpt and other information, go to www.contextbooks.com/new.html#target.