Eighty-five percent of Americans favor mandatory registration of handguns, but Congress refuses to pass a handgun registration bill. This inconsistency becomes understandable only when one considers that the National Rifle Association gave 1.7 million dollars to congressional Republicans -- perennially against gun control laws -- and only $283,000 to congressional Democrats before the 1998 elections.
Elizabeth Dole exited the race for the Republican Presidential nomination before a single vote had been cast. She declared, "In the real America, it's more important to raise issues than to raise campaign funds, but in a national campaign the bottom line remains money." Each American should have equal power and every candidate deserves the opportunity to gain support on the basis of his or her ideas -- this is the foundation of democracy.
In Federalist 10, James Madison wrote: "If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote."
In a society where one person represents one vote, Madison's theory is sound and the special interests of a minority are held at bay. But the twentieth century has witnessed the acceleration of a political means more powerful than a vote: special interest money. Dollars equal power in today's political system, and thus, America has been stripped of the principle on which it was founded: a process in which everyone's voice can be heard. The fading of this ideal has caused the American people to look to Washington with distrust, disgust, and apathy. Money and special interest groups overwhelm democracy by destroying the accountability between the American people and their chosen leaders.
The way to start combating the negativity that permeates American politics is by reforming the system's rules. Current campaign finance regulations retain a devastating loophole: While the system limits the contributions that individuals and political action committees (PACs) can make directly to candidates, it does not limit the amount of "soft money" that individuals, interest groups, and corporations can give to political parties. The parties, desperate to regain the influence and clout they enjoyed before Progressive reforms and the onset of mass communication and society, eagerly seek out and accept these unregulated funds, often given in bundles of millions of dollars. Much of this money funnels its way back to the party's candidates, even though the funds are legally restricted to means of improving democracy by "getting out the vote."
Soft money has a resounding influence on public policy decisions. Politicians and parties cater to the needs of people and groups with money because they know that keeping the rich happy is essential to receiving money in future elections; the loopholes give financially well to do individuals and groups unfair access to policy makers. On June 22 of this year, airline corporations donated $115,000 in soft money to Republican committees. The next day, the Senate gutted a strong passenger rights bill.
Later that day, the committees received $95,000 more from the airlines. Some PACs contribute to candidates or parties only to increase their clout in Washington, backing likely winners from both parties to secure access rather than following a strict ideological line. A system in which groups ignore issues -- for reasons of self-advancement -- is one that is failing. Such failure has made the power of a vote appear futile to the average citizen.
Time-Warner recently became the fourth major corporation refusing to contribute money to political parties. Such self-restraint must be commended. Other corporations should follow suit, but the pressures of today's market system make this next to impossible. It is time for the government to step in, ban soft-money, and rid our political system of its pressing ill.
Deep wallets have drowned out the voice of the voter, and the voice of the candidate who would vote for common sense gun control, but lacks the money to communicate his or her ideas.
