With two weeks to go until voting ends in a critical midterm election, here is a roundup of what we’re looking at, what we’re looking for, and what questions it all raises. This week we’re looking at who pays for campaigns and political ads, and at fundraising emails.
What We’re Reading - Who’s Paying for Campaigns?
Follow the money is usually good advice for voters. But what if the money doesn’t want to be found? Does it matter if voters don’t care who pays for campaigns or ads?
Prof. Nikki Usher in the Los Angeles Times Op-Ed: Misleading political TV ads are filling up California’s ‘news deserts’
“…what’s even more troubling than the amounts of money spent is that information disorder and political polarization make it harder than ever to discern facts from baseless claims or misinformation.”
National Public Radio Dark money groups have spent nearly $1 billion so far to boost GOP Senate candidates
”More than $1.6 billion has been spent or booked on TV ads in a dozen Senate races, with $3 out of every $4 being spent in six states — Georgia, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, Nevada and Ohio, according to an NPR analysis of data provided by the ad-tracking firm AdImpact.
Most of that money is coming from dark money outside groups with little-to-no donor transparency…”
The New York Times Democrats Decried Dark Money. Then They Won With It in 2020
”The findings reveal the growth and ascendancy of a shadow political infrastructure that is reshaping American politics, as megadonors to these nonprofits take advantage of loose disclosure laws to make multimillion-dollar outlays in total secrecy. Some good-government activists worry that the exploding role of undisclosed cash threatens to accelerate the erosion of trust in the country’s political system.”
What We’re Asking
Would knowing who was paying for campaigns and ads change how voters made up their minds? Would it make a difference on election day?
Should the government require full disclosure of all donors to campaigns and groups trying to get voters to cast one ballot or another, even if it might not change the outcome of an election?
Is transparency a democratic good, regardless of its impact?
What We’re Reading: Fundraising Emails
Fear and anger raise money and turn out votes. They can also undermine our democracy. Campaigns should be able to find ways to make the truth click bait.
Tim Miller in The New York Times The Most Toxic Politicians Are Dragging Us to Hell With Emails and Texts
“…overall, it’s a race to the bottom to inflame a party’s own voters with the most intensity and frequency.”
Blue Tent The Two Worst Email Fundraising Vendors—and the Democratic Groups and Candidates That Use Them
”As Democratic donors know too well, each day brings a deluge of misleading, manipulative or outright false email appeals from Democratic candidates and institutions.”
Mike Nellis in Campaigns and Elections Why Scammy Fundraising Practices Should Concern Both Sides
”Digital fundraising without ethics and character is theft, plain and simple. We shouldn’t be scamming people with deceptive tactics or scaring seniors into unknowingly giving away their rent and grocery money to political campaign…”
What We’re Asking
Should there be standards for campaign emails? If so, who would set and enforce them?
Can campaigns raise as much money (or more) and turnout as many votes (or more) using less awful email tactics?