Money Lessons from a Year on the Campaign ; Independent Groups Didn't Usurp the Role of the Major Parties, but They Did Wield Influence at Key Moments

By Gail Russell Chaddock writer of The Christian Science Monitor | The Christian Science Monitor, November 9, 2004 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Money Lessons from a Year on the Campaign ; Independent Groups Didn't Usurp the Role of the Major Parties, but They Did Wield Influence at Key Moments


Gail Russell Chaddock writer of The Christian Science Monitor, The Christian Science Monitor


A year ago, insiders were calling new, independent 527 groups the end of political parties - and through much of the 2004 campaign, it looked as if they might be right.

New groups with names like Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, American Coming Together, the Media Fund and MoveOn.org, were raising vast sums of money and using them for ads that voters noticed, right up until the Nov. 2 vote. The 527s, named after a clause in the tax code, could raise funds in unlimited amounts, and did.

At the same time, national parties could raise funds only in limited amounts from individual donors, and the Federal Election Commission refused to close the "527 loophole" in the 2002 campaign- finance law. It meant that a handful of wealthy donors, through 527s, could hijack the election, party advocates said.

But early analysis of the money trail in the 2004 campaign signals that parties held their own by bringing more small contributors into the process mainly through the Internet. At the same time, the voter-mobilization drives launched by 527s, especially on the left, contributed to the highest turnout in an American election since 1968.

"It looks as if early fears that [campaign finance reform] would mean death for the parties were highly exaggerated," says Michael Malbin, director of the Campaign Finance Institute, a nonpartisan group affiliated with George Washington University in Washington, D.C.

In the 2004 cycle, 527 groups raised at least $463.9 million to influence federal elections, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The top three individual contributors alone gave more than $64 million to defeat President Bush through 527s. At the same time, pro-Bush 527s spent nearly $30 million on broadcast ads in the final three weeks of the election - triple the amount spent by their pro- Democrat counterparts.

When Congress passed a sweeping campaign-finance reform in 2001, experts predicted it would be just a matter of time before big money contributors found a way to evade it. By late 2003, the so-called 527 loophole emerged as the vehicle of choice for moving $1 million- plus contributions into federal elections, avoiding the contribution limits and disclosure requirements of the McCain-Feingold law.

According to the most recent IRS filings, financier George Soros, the top 527 contributor, gave more than $27 million to defeat President Bush. Another Democrat, Peter Lewis, gave $23.1 million to newly formed groups such as the Joint Victory Campaign 2004, America Coming Together, and Young Democrats of America.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Money Lessons from a Year on the Campaign ; Independent Groups Didn't Usurp the Role of the Major Parties, but They Did Wield Influence at Key Moments
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?