Event Title
Session 1
Location
Centre de formation et de séminaires (CEFOS) in Remich, Luxembourg
Start Date
6-7-2013 10:30 AM
Description
Session 1: “Causes of Changes in Campaign Finance Regulations”
- Diana Dwyre, “Campaign Finance Deregulation in the US: Considerations of Privacy, Transparency, Corruption, and Accountability”
- Justin Fisher, “Britain’s Stop-Go Approach to Party Finance Reform”
Discussant: Michael Koß
ABSTRACTS
Campaign Finance Deregulation in the US: Considerations of Privacy, Transparency, Corruption and Accountability
Diana Dwyre, California State University, Chico, USA
In recent years, there has been a rather sharp deregulatory shift in the rules governing campaign finance activities in the U.S. after decades of increasing regulation of fundraising, spending, and disclosure. This shift has come mostly from the courts and the Federal Election Commission, the agency responsible for most federal campaign finance regulation and enforcement. Congress has not responded with laws to counter or refine these deregulatory actions, in part because of a lack of bipartisan agreement on how to address some of the more controversial developments. How have these recent deregulatory changes altered the campaign finance regulatory landscape, and how have they affected the behavior and relative financial influence of various political actors that participate in campaign fundraising and spending?
I focus specifically on the rise in the amount of outside spending in recent elections and the increase in the amount of anonymous spending from organizations that are not required to disclose the source of their donations. I examine the effects of these activities on parties and candidates in particular, as the only electoral players that appear on the ballot and can be subject to direct accountability by voters. These changes and their consequences lead to some important questions about the structure and normative basis of a campaign finance regulatory system. For example, is the source of campaign spending important information for voters to have, or is it none of our business? And does it matter if candidates’ messages are diminished in the face of so many other messages, many from individuals and groups that are not subject to the fundraising limits faced by candidates and their parties? I address these and other questions in the context of the current regulatory landscape as well as a political environment in which there appears to be little chance that elected representatives will address these changes that have been based on the constitutional interpretations of unelected officials.
Britain’s Stop-Go Approach to Party Finance Reform
Justin Fisher, University of Brunel, UK
Until 2000, British political finance was subject to a remarkable lack of regulation, with the principal piece of legislation having originally been passed in the nineteenth century. Since then there have been two pieces of legislation, which have changed the regulatory landscape considerably. However, the ‘problem’ of British party finance refuses to go away. Far from the 2000 legislation solving the ‘problem’, there have been three major enquiries, the two most recent of which have recommended significant further reform. The result is that Britain has developed a stop-go approach to reform, whereby reviews are entered into with reforming zeal only for the ensuing proposals to be shelved by a failure of the main political parties to reach agreement reflecting the predictions of Scarrow’s electoral economy model much more than those of Katz and Mair’s cartel model. This paper therefore assesses the extent to which the ‘problems’ of British party finance remain and considers whether it is likely that any further reform will be introduced in the medium term.
Session 1
Centre de formation et de séminaires (CEFOS) in Remich, Luxembourg
Session 1: “Causes of Changes in Campaign Finance Regulations”
- Diana Dwyre, “Campaign Finance Deregulation in the US: Considerations of Privacy, Transparency, Corruption, and Accountability”
- Justin Fisher, “Britain’s Stop-Go Approach to Party Finance Reform”
Discussant: Michael Koß
ABSTRACTS
Campaign Finance Deregulation in the US: Considerations of Privacy, Transparency, Corruption and Accountability
Diana Dwyre, California State University, Chico, USA
In recent years, there has been a rather sharp deregulatory shift in the rules governing campaign finance activities in the U.S. after decades of increasing regulation of fundraising, spending, and disclosure. This shift has come mostly from the courts and the Federal Election Commission, the agency responsible for most federal campaign finance regulation and enforcement. Congress has not responded with laws to counter or refine these deregulatory actions, in part because of a lack of bipartisan agreement on how to address some of the more controversial developments. How have these recent deregulatory changes altered the campaign finance regulatory landscape, and how have they affected the behavior and relative financial influence of various political actors that participate in campaign fundraising and spending?
I focus specifically on the rise in the amount of outside spending in recent elections and the increase in the amount of anonymous spending from organizations that are not required to disclose the source of their donations. I examine the effects of these activities on parties and candidates in particular, as the only electoral players that appear on the ballot and can be subject to direct accountability by voters. These changes and their consequences lead to some important questions about the structure and normative basis of a campaign finance regulatory system. For example, is the source of campaign spending important information for voters to have, or is it none of our business? And does it matter if candidates’ messages are diminished in the face of so many other messages, many from individuals and groups that are not subject to the fundraising limits faced by candidates and their parties? I address these and other questions in the context of the current regulatory landscape as well as a political environment in which there appears to be little chance that elected representatives will address these changes that have been based on the constitutional interpretations of unelected officials.
Britain’s Stop-Go Approach to Party Finance Reform
Justin Fisher, University of Brunel, UK
Until 2000, British political finance was subject to a remarkable lack of regulation, with the principal piece of legislation having originally been passed in the nineteenth century. Since then there have been two pieces of legislation, which have changed the regulatory landscape considerably. However, the ‘problem’ of British party finance refuses to go away. Far from the 2000 legislation solving the ‘problem’, there have been three major enquiries, the two most recent of which have recommended significant further reform. The result is that Britain has developed a stop-go approach to reform, whereby reviews are entered into with reforming zeal only for the ensuing proposals to be shelved by a failure of the main political parties to reach agreement reflecting the predictions of Scarrow’s electoral economy model much more than those of Katz and Mair’s cartel model. This paper therefore assesses the extent to which the ‘problems’ of British party finance remain and considers whether it is likely that any further reform will be introduced in the medium term.