Politicians and Ethics | Introduction
Political clout in Washington, D.C., frequently depends on money. Seeking to promote their own agenda, interests such as political action committees (PACs), corporate and union representatives, and wealthy individuals use the lure of money—legally and illegally—to win access to key decisionmakers and gain their support on issues.
Campaign contributions are the most common way that money is used to influence politics. Each year, congressmembers receive hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions. Regulated by federal law, these contributions can be considered illegal depending on the amount contributed, the source of the contribution, and how the money is spent.
Money is crucial to congressmembers who are seeking reelection. As of 1995, the average House of Representatives candidate spent approximately $440,000, while the average Senate race cost $4.4 million. According to senators and representatives, raising campaign contributions from constituents and other sources is a never-ending process that is necessary to pay for expensive campaigns and to gain advantage over opponents. In the words of Common Cause president Ann McBride, “A senator must raise, from the day when he or she arrives in the Senate, $15,000 a week . . . for the entire term.”
Congressmembers’ practice of soliciting campaign contributions has raised the question of whether money compromises politicians’ ethics. Several observers argue that contributions can influence the way some members vote in Congress. According to former Virginia representative Leslie Byrne, “There are some colleagues that I’ve worked with whom I think it does compromise. They feel like they have to ameliorate or change their position or be careful of certain votes for fear of losing certain contributions.” Others equate the acceptance of contributions with bribery. As former California governor and presidential candidate Jerry Brown said in a 1995 interview, “To get the money, you must commit common-law bribery. Campaign contributions are meant to influence public officials in their public capacity. That is bribery, per se.”
Other experts disagree that contributions “buy” legislators’ votes. Many politicians and lobbyists argue that although contributing money can help donors gain access to legislators, a contribution does not guarantee a vote in the contributor’s favor. Herbert Alexander, a lobbying and PAC researcher, writes, “Access should not be confused with buying votes.” Retired New York representative Hamilton Fish Jr. states, “I look at a contribution as a ‘thank you’ for a position I took, not as expecting that I would take a position in the future. I always thought of it as a reward, not a bribe.” Law professor Bradley A. Smith adds, “Those who have studied voting patterns on a systematic basis are almost unanimous in finding that campaign contributions affect very few votes in the legislature.”
Regardless of whether they believe that contributions influence votes, many congressmembers and others agree that the acceptance of large amounts of money gives the appearance that politicians are beholden to contributors. In the words of former Florida representative Jim Bacchus, “It leads people to believe that we are working for someone other than for them; either that we are working for ourselves, or for some selfish special interests.” But political scientist Gary Jacobson defends the extent of campaign contributions as a form of free speech that allows contributors to express their opinions on various issues to congressmembers. Congressmembers in turn, he maintains, use the contributions to finance their efforts to communicate their political views to the electorate. He argues, “The amount of information that voters have and [their] turnout directly relate to the amount of money spent.”
Some senators and representatives, such as former Senate majority leader George Mitchell and former House minority leader Robert Michel, have cited the role of money in politics and a reluctance among congressmembers to reform the system as reasons for leaving Congress. Other legislators contend that receiving generous contributions is a legal campaign practice that is vital for a candidate’s electoral success. The impact of money in Congress is among the issues considered in Politicians and Ethics: Current Controversies, in which authors examine the ethics of politicians’ values and behavior.
