Favorite

Indentured servants 

Barron’s, the weekly Wall Street newspaper, is bucking conventional wisdom by predicting that the Republicans will retain control of the U.S. House and Senate.

How does it justify its analysis?

“We studied every single race — all 435 House seats and 33 in the Senate — and based our predictions about the outcome in almost every race on which candidate had the largest campaign war chest, a sign of superior grass-roots support. We ignore the polls. … Pollsters, for instance, have upstate New York Republican Rep. Tom Reynolds trailing Democratic challenger Jack Davis, who owns a manufacturing plant. But Reynolds raised $3.3 million in campaign contributions versus $1.6 million for Davis, so we score him the winner.”

That formulation sounds like satire. Sure, the voters might express a preference for Davis, but Reynolds has more money, so he’s obviously going to win.

And like any good satire, there is a significant amount of truth in Barron’s logic. As the article points out, the candidate with the most money has won 98 percent of the U.S. House races and 89 percent of the U.S. Senate contests in recent years.

Unfortunately, Barron’s is deadly serious. (They weren’t even being sarcastic when they said that a stocked campaign treasury is “a sign of superior grass-roots support,” as counter-intuitive as that sounds.)

But whether or not Barron’s congressional forecast is proven correct, its theory will likely hold true in Arkansas this year, where the statewide candidates with the most money are expected to win.

In fact, that may be the story of the 2006 elections.

With only two notable exceptions — the Republican primary for lieutenant governor and the Democratic primary for treasurer — financing has made the difference in every race.

The standout example is the Democratic primary for lieutenant governor, where money is the only way to explain the outcome. In that case, Bill Halter defeated three current and former state legislators despite not having lived in Arkansas for over two decades. Halter didn’t have much support among the party establishment, but he spent almost $900,000 and used it to blanket the airwaves with commercials that apparently had the desired effect.

The effect on Arkansas politics, however, is another matter. One candidate for statewide office who lost in the primary told me he thinks money was the sole factor in his race, and he said he probably wouldn’t stand for office again if he knew his opponent would outspend him exponentially.

Often, that kind of spending involves personal debt. Halter, for instance, loaned himself $700,000 just for the primary. Other candidates have put up their personal assets as collateral for bank loans or lines of credit for their campaigns.

In effect, they are tying their family’s financial security to their ability to raise campaign funds to retire the debt. So when they ask someone to give money to their campaign, they’re really asking them for a bailout. And if the loan is called or the line of credit runs out, they might just do anything for a campaign donation.

According to Arkansas News Bureau columnist John Brummett, “Bill Halter recently canceled some of his television time … because his new and pregnant wife suggested quite sensibly that he put a lid on the rate of depletion of his ample personal resources.”

That’s some serious pressure. But when election outcomes are based on who spends the most money, it is no wonder that the winners are those willing to leverage themselves the most.

As a result, our political system only caters to those who can give the most to campaigns. That’s why so much time and energy was devoted to the attempted repeal of the estate tax, which affects less than one percent of Americans (the very richest). And that’s why there is no progress on health care, energy policy and other issues that everyone but the wealthiest citizens and corporations are deeply concerned about.

These days, our government only responds to monied interests, who can underwrite think tanks to introduce ideas, public relations campaigns to promote them and lobbyists to pay legislators to vote for them.

In this way, our supposedly democratic system is fundamentally distorted. While the problem of money in politics is nothing new, it has recently achieved the level of grotesque, with office-holders spending all of their time fundraising and candidates with pregnant wives risking their fortunes because newspapers can predict election results based on how much money a campaign has.

Now the only people able to run for office are the fabulously rich or those willing to do their bidding.

Favorite

From the ArkTimes store

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

More by Warwick Sabin

  • Helena's disappearing buildings

    Preservationists hope to slow demolitions.
    • Mar 22, 2007
  • Trailers headed to Dumas

    Gov. Mike Beebe issued the following statement earlier today: Although this decision by FEMA to deny emergency funds to Desha County defies common sense, Arkansas will take care of its own people.
    • Mar 9, 2007
  • Youth Ranch robbed, vandalized

    According to a press release we just received: The Donald W. Reynolds Campus of the Arkansas Sheriff’s Youth Ranches (The Ranch) located near Fort Smith was vandalized overnight Thursday.  Items stolen during the break-in included all of the children’s saddles, food, tools and supplies from The Ranch’s carpentry shop and all equipment from its auto shop.  An investigation is underway with the Crawford County Sheriff’s Office.
    • Mar 9, 2007
  • More »

Latest in Warwick Sabin

  • Trickle-up theory

    Through thick and thin, there has always been one group of dedicated Americans whose support for President George W. Bush has been unwavering: The wealthy.
    • Mar 8, 2007
  • Time to go

    Tough questions face us in Iraq and it's time to confront them directly.
    • Mar 1, 2007
  • Plugged in

    One reason why the South remained solidly Democratic during the mid-20th century was the enduring gratitude to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who brought electricity to the poor, rural parts of the region. According to one historical account, “Althou
    • Feb 22, 2007
  • More »

Event Calendar

« »

August

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31  

Most Viewed

  • Charter secret

    These are hard times for those who believe in traditional public schools, run by democratically elected representatives, open to all on equal terms.
  • On Charlottesville

    Watching the Charlottesville spectacle from halfway across the country, I confess that my first instinct was to raillery. Vanilla ISIS, somebody called this mob of would-be Nazis. A parade of love-deprived nerds marching bravely out of their parents' basements carrying tiki torches from Home Depot.
  • Home is where the hatred is

    According to the Southern Poverty Law Center's "Hate Map," a chapter of the Christian American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan is headquartered in Hoxie, a small town in Lawrence County that also holds the distinction of being the first battleground of the segregationists in the fight to integrate Arkansas schools.
  • Klan's president

    Everything that Donald Trump does — make that everything that he says — is calculated to thrill his lustiest disciples. But he is discovering that what was brilliant for a politician is a miscalculation for a president, because it deepens the chasm between him and most Americans.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: Charter secret

    • The problem with your logic is that it only focuses on benefitting poor kids by…

    • on August 17, 2017
  • Re: On Charlottesville

    • Others will find fault of course but, IMO, the above piece is one of the…

    • on August 16, 2017
 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation