The marriage of money with politics in the U.S. traces back to the colonial days. In 1759, George Washington employed rum punch, money and a fiddler to bolster his election to the House of Burgesses. There was an understanding, in those days, that men of means and education assumed leadership positions in the government. Over time, however, the political process changed and politics became big business. This article covers the progression of events and legislation that shaped and influenced today's political environment.

SEE: Lobbying: K Street's Influence On Wall Street

In the early days of the republic, politics as we know it didn't exist. There were no formal campaigns and the process was primitive and relatively inexpensive. The method for federal elections was very different than it is today. For example, senators were chosen by state legislatures up until passage of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913.

At the presidential level, there was an unwritten rule that campaigning was beneath the dignity of the office. That philosophy worked in the beginning, but quickly changed with the rise of political parties and the start of the Industrial Revolution. As communications and transportation improved, economic and social changes brought more people into the process. Politicians had to make the leap from personal persuasion to convincing large groups to support them at rallies, caucuses and conventions.

In the early 1800s, a Midwest or Mid-Atlantic congressional campaign could cost up to $4,000. The bill was typically less in New England and the South. The big money applied to state-level offices, where five-figure sums were spent on friendly newspaper ads, pamphlets and other campaign items. Floats, slogans, songs, coonskin caps and revival meetings were all used to capture the imaginations of voters.

National political committees were spending up to $100,000 on presidential campaigns by the mid-1800s. As the size and cost of government grew, more businessmen were attracted to it as a means of furthering their business interests. Patronage translated into loyalty and a means of extracting donations in exchange for generous political favors. Regular contributions to those in power were expected if you hoped to hold onto your job.

The assassination of President Garfield in 1881 prompted a major change in the political climate and passage of the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act, two years later. It required competitive exams for federal government jobs that would be awarded based on merit, not on political affiliation or financial support.

Real-World Politics
As the influence of money took over the political process, the amount required to win an election grew enormously. Some reforms have had unintended side effects. For example, when the primary process was first implemented, it was designed to take power away from political insiders and into the hands of everyday voters. However, the primaries extended the election cycle and significantly increased the need for additional funding.

Reforms have not had the desired effect of reducing the costs of running for office, because candidates devise ways to work around them. Creative accounting and "soft money" have combined to circumvent the national party infrastructure.

Soft money fundraising, unlike its hard money counterpart, is not subject to federal campaign finance laws, because it's not controlled by the candidates or their election committees. That opens the door for contributions from a wide array of entities and anyone who has otherwise been banned from directly funding campaigns. This includes labor unions, corporations and wealthy individuals whose contributions would normally be limited.

Political Action Committees (PAC) represent specific labor, business or ideological interests, and raise money to help elect and defeat targeted candidates. These PACs must register with the Federal Election Commission and can donate $5,000 per individual election. They can also give $15,000 to any national party and receive up to $5,000 from an individual or organization per year.

Political Figures and Scandals
In the post-revolutionary period, "generous gentlemen" were expected to spend their own money to aid their runs for office. James Madison failed in his bid for a seat in the Virginia House of Delegates because he didn't think it proper to combine money with politics.

Abraham Lincoln awarded patronage jobs in exchange for millions of dollars in Civil War contracts for northern businessmen. The businesses were expected to contribute to his campaigns and kick back 5% of officeholders' salaries. During his campaign for a second term, his agents were reportedly "paying out money like water," to sway the vote his way.

During the construction of the transcontinental railway, the Union Pacific Railroad gave discounted stock to influential politicians in exchange for their continued support of additional project funding. Known as the Credit Mobilier scandal of 1872, one of those tainted was Representative James A. Garfield of Ohio, who went on to become president.

Tammany Hall (or the Tammany Society) was a Democratic Party machine that controlled New York politics up to the 1930s. It derived its influence from government contracts, job kickbacks, patronage and the power of corrupt leaders like William "Boss" Tweed.

When Standard Oil pumped $250,000 into William McKinley's campaign coffers, it noted that its contributions were equivalent to "taking out an insurance policy." In one of the most sensational incidents, Secretary of the Interior Albert Fall was convicted of accepting bribes from oil companies, in exchange for low lease rates on the petroleum reserves at Teapot Dome. The scandal damaged the reputation of then-president Warren Harding.

Louisiana was well-known for its corruption under former Governor Huey "Kingfish" Long. His son Russell, a former senator, once said, "The distinction between a large campaign contribution and a bribe is almost a hairline's difference." Scandals such as these continue to this day, upping the ante with more money being tossed into the fold and larger earmarks doled out.

Campaign Finance Legislation
Listed below is a summary of the major laws and court rulings that have dealt with campaign fundraising and financing:

  • 1907 - Tillman Act: Prohibited national banks and corporations from making contributions to any elections for political office.

  • 1910 - Publicity Act: Required national committees and parties to file campaign reports for all receipts and expenses.

  • 1911 - Publicity Act amended: Required reporting by candidates in all federal elections and established spending limits of $5,000 for a house seat and $10,000 for a senate seat.

  • 1921 - Newberry v. United States: The Supreme Court struck down the spending limits set in the Publicity Act, saying that Congressional authority to regulate elections did not extend to nomination exercises and party primaries.

  • 1925 - Federal Corrupt Practices Act: Extended coverage to multi-state parties and election committees, and set up reporting framework for receipts and expenses. Raised the spending limit for senate campaigns to $25,000.

  • 1939 - Hatch Act: Barred federal employees from collecting campaign donations and participating in politics. Set individual contribution limit for a federal campaign at $5,000 and major party spending at $3 million per calendar year.

  • 1943 - Smith-Connally Act: Prohibited labor unions from making contributions to federal campaigns.

  • 1941 - United States v. Classic: The Supreme Court ruled that Congress has the power to regulate and limit spending on primary elections in cases where state law made them a part of the election process and they effectively determined the outcome of the election.

  • 1943 - Tillman Act extended: Prohibited contributions from corporations and unions, leading to the creation of PACs.

  • 1971 - Federal Elections Campaign Act (FECA): Established disclosure requirements for political committees and federal candidates. Set limits on how much a candidate could spend on media and the campaign.

  • 1974 - FECA amended: Set up Federal Election Commission (FEC) and a voluntary public financing system for presidential elections and matching funds for presidential primaries. Replaced media spending limits with total campaign limits for both congressional and presidential elections. Established federal contribution limits for individuals, political committees and national parties.

  • 1975 - FEC permitted corporate PACs to solicit stockholders and employees.

  • 1976 - Buckley v. Valeo: The Supreme Court ruled that money is speech and protected by the First Amendment. Spending limits are therefore unconstitutional. Only ads that advocate a candidate (rather than issues) are subject to regulation. Spending limits can apply to candidates who accept public financing.

  • 2002 - Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain-Feingold): Increased individual contribution limit from $1,000 to $2,000 with inflation adjustment. Eliminated soft money contributions to national parties and prohibited corporations and unions from paying for federal candidate ads within 30 days of a primary/convention or 60 days from a general election.

  • 2010 - Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission: The Supreme Court ruled that limits on corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections, violate the First Amendment.

The Bottom Line
The intersection of money and politics often starts right at the top. In a well-publicized example, the Clintons sold Lincoln bedroom sleepovers starting at $100,000 a night. They also conducted 98 White House gatherings where $50,000 bought you three danish and a cup of coffee.

It's impossible to remove money from politics, especially since it enjoys constitutional protection affirmed by the Supreme Court. Without voluntary limits, the price of a political office will continue to rise. Politics is about power, and money buys power. The reality is that the money has to come from somewhere and most efforts to control it haven't work, haven't been enforced or have been overturned by the Supreme Court.

Related Articles
  1. Insurance

    Medicare 101: Do You Need All 4 Parts?

    Medicare is the United States’ health insurance program for those over age 65. Medicare has four parts, but you might not need them all.
  2. Economics

    Understanding Donald Trump's Stance on China

    Find out why China bothers Donald Trump so much, and why the 2016 Republican presidential candidate argues for a return to protectionist trade policies.
  3. Economics

    Will Putin Ever Leave Office?

    Find out when, or if, Russian President Vladimir Putin will ever relinquish control over the Russian government, and whether it matters.
  4. Economics

    What China's New Policy Means for Business

    Now that China has eliminated its one-child policy, how will the new policy impact businesses?
  5. Markets

    Will Paris Attacks Undo the European Union Dream?

    Last Friday's attacks in Paris are transforming the migrant crisis into an EU security threat, which could undermine the European Union dream.
  6. Insurance

    Avoid the Obamacare No-Insurance Penalty by Jan. 31

    If you don't have health insurance, act NOW or you could owe penalties on your 2016 taxes, in addition to this year's.
  7. Budgeting

    How Much Will it Cost to Become President In 2016?

    The 2016 race to the White House will largely be determined by who can spend the most money. Here is a look at how much it will cost to win the presidency.
  8. Economics

    How to Invest in the Philippines' Stock Market

    The Philippines offers more long-term growth potential than most economies around the world. Here's how to play it.
  9. Economics

    Current Probability of Donald Trump as President

    Predict the current odds of a Donald Trump presidency, and understand the factors that have kept him on top and the looming challenges he faces.
  10. Economics

    Explaining Devaluation

    Devaluation is the deliberate decrease in one county’s currency relative to the currency of other countries.
  1. Where did the phrase "pork barrel" come from?

    Use of the phrase "pork barrel" dates back to 1863 and was initially used in reference to any money that a government spent ... Read Full Answer >>
  2. What are some examples of "pork barrel politics" in the United States?

    So-called "pork barrel politics" has been present in the United States' legislative and, to a lesser degree, executive branches ... Read Full Answer >>
  3. Can FHA loans be used for condos?

    A borrower can obtain Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans to finance the purchase of a condominium as long as the ... Read Full Answer >>
  4. Can I get dental insurance with Medicare?

    Medicare does not offer dental insurance that will cover dental care and medical supplies, such as cleanings, sealants, extractions, ... Read Full Answer >>
  5. Who can make catch-up contributions to a Health Savings Account (HSA)?

    An eligible individual who is 55 years or older at the end of his tax year can make additional catch-up contributions to ... Read Full Answer >>
  6. Do banks offer FHA loans?

    Many major U.S. banks, including Well Fargo & Company, U.S. Bancorp, Bank of America and Flagstar Bancorp, offer Federal ... Read Full Answer >>

You May Also Like

Hot Definitions
  1. Black Friday

    1. A day of stock market catastrophe. Originally, September 24, 1869, was deemed Black Friday. The crash was sparked by gold ...
  2. Turkey

    Slang for an investment that yields disappointing results or turns out worse than expected. Failed business deals, securities ...
  3. Barefoot Pilgrim

    A slang term for an unsophisticated investor who loses all of his or her wealth by trading equities in the stock market. ...
  4. Quick Ratio

    The quick ratio is an indicator of a company’s short-term liquidity. The quick ratio measures a company’s ability to meet ...
  5. Black Tuesday

    October 29, 1929, when the DJIA fell 12% - one of the largest one-day drops in stock market history. More than 16 million ...
  6. Black Monday

    October 19, 1987, when the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) lost almost 22% in a single day. That event marked the beginning ...
Trading Center