How Big Money Corrupts Local Elections
It’s no secret that it often takes some money to run for office. It’s also not much of a mystery that excessive amounts of money contribute to corruption as donors seek access and candidates seek power.
Unfortunately, it seems like part and parcel of the political landscape in America. As far back as the days of Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall, the influence of money and power have corrupted local politics and fueled calls for reform.
The influence of big-money donors on local and municipal elections has grown significantly in recent years, reshaping the political landscape of cities and towns across the United States.
Join us as we explore the extent of this trend, using statistics and specific examples of political bodies and individuals that have benefited from large financial contributions. We’ll also explain why this phenomenon occurs and emphasize the need for campaign finance reform to ensure fair and democratic local elections.
The Rising Tide of Money in Local Elections
Statistics reveal a sharp increase in the amount of money flowing into local elections over the past decade. According to the Campaign Finance Institute, spending in local elections has seen a notable surge, with some cities experiencing increases of over 200% in campaign contributions since 2010.
For example, the amount of money spent on mayoral races in New York City nearly tripled from $29 million in 2009 to $96 million in 2021. Twenty-five million dollars of that amount went toward political ads.
Fed up with politics as usual?
One significant aspect of this trend is the growing influence of independent expenditure groups, commonly known as Super PACs. These groups can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to support or oppose candidates, often outspending the candidates' own campaigns.
During the 2023 Denver mayoral election, for example, outside funding groups spent $3.6 million, which was in addition to the $6.6 million raised by the candidates themselves.
As this graph compiled by Open Secrets demonstrates, campaign funding, while rising, has remained fairly stable among establishment parties, labor unions, and others. However, the surge in outside spending by Super PACs has skyrocketed since they were given the legal green light in 2010, topping more than $1 billion dollars during the 2016 elections.
According to data compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice, in 2021, Big Money flowing in from non-profits and individuals outpaced funds from individual small donors by more than 60%. In fact, just 21 individuals or wealthy couples spent more on political campaigns than all small-dollar donors combined. Despite this imbalance, politicians will brag about the amount of $10 donations pouring in from the people while withholding the amount that they collect from dark money interests.
Cities Influenced by Big Money
Big spending isn’t just the domain of presidential or congressional candidates running on a national level. Various cities have seen their local elections influenced by big-money donors in recent years. Often, no one knows where the money comes from.
Under federal law, Super PACs are supposed to file regular reports detailing their spending and donors. However, in New Jersey, for example, they needn’t disclose who’s funding them at all.
Here are some notable examples:
San Francisco, CA: The 2020 San Francisco District Attorney race saw unprecedented spending by independent groups. Organizations like GrowSF and TogetherSF poured millions of dollars into the race, dwarfing the candidates' own fundraising efforts. This trend continues into the 2024 elections, with wealthy donors like William Oberndorf and local developer Nick Podell contributing large sums to influence the outcomes of local races in the Bay Area.
Chicago, IL: In the 2019 mayoral election, billionaire Ken Griffin spent over $10 million supporting his preferred candidates. He also donated another $100 million on various state and federal candidates in 2022, and sank $50 million into the failed gubernatorial campaign of Aurora mayor, Richard Irving. He is the third single largest individual political donor from the finance sector in the United States, behind only Richard Uilein and George Soros. This level of spending not only influenced the mayoral race but also had a ripple effect on city council elections, where outside spending reached record levels.
Los Angeles, CA: The 2022 mayoral race in Los Angeles was heavily influenced by big-money donors. Rick Caruso, a billionaire real estate developer, spent over $100 million of his own money on his campaign, setting a new record for self-funding in a local election.
Seattle, WA: The 2019 Seattle City Council elections were marked by significant spending from Amazon, which contributed $1.5 million to a business-friendly political action committee (PAC). This influx of money aimed to sway the council composition in favor of candidates who were supportive of Amazon's interests.
Houston, TX: In the 2019 Houston mayoral race, wealthy donors played a significant role in shaping the outcome of the election. Wealthy business people and political action committees contribute millions to the campaigns of their preferred candidates, leading to a highly competitive and expensive election. One of the more controversial candidates was local businessman and trial lawyer Tony Buzbee, who sank more than $10 million of his own money, and pledged to spend “whatever it takes” to defeat incumbent Sylvester Turner in a very tight and contentious race. It was so close, the candidates faced each other in a run-off election, with Turner ultimately emerging victorious.
However, Big Money corruption is not just a Big City problem.
In Lexington County, South Carolina, there have been accusations of a newly formed non-profit called “Protecting Lexington’s Future” investing exorbitant amounts of money to challenge incumbents in several districts for city council seats during the 2024 elections. Several candidates have admitted taking campaign contributions from developers, but South Carolina law doesn’t require third-party campaign spending to be reported.
Carter Lake, Iowa, is one area that seems to be a bottomless font of dark money donors. Although the town only has a population of just under 4,000 residents, several non-profits and wealthy individuals have contributed millions to various PACs and Super PACs in an effort to sway local elections.
Politico reported in 2023 on a coordinated effort to target 171 areas throughout the United States that are designated college towns in an effort to flip seats at the state and federal levels. This drive is supported by unprecedented levels of spending, mainly on ads targeted toward college students and staff. However, these efforts are also trickling down to local school boards and city council races across the country.
The Mechanisms Behind Big Money Influence
The increasing influence of big-money donors in local elections can be attributed to several factors, including weak or unenforced campaign finance laws and loopholes that allow large contributions.
Here’s how they impact our elections at all levels of government:
Campaign Finance Laws and Loopholes
While federal elections have strict contribution limits and disclosure requirements, local elections often have more lenient rules. Many states and municipalities lack comprehensive regulations, allowing wealthy individuals and organizations to donate large sums of money without much oversight.
In addition, the Supreme Court's Citizens United v. FEC decision in 2010 opened the floodgates for unlimited independent expenditures by corporations and unions, significantly impacting local elections.
Independent Expenditure Committees (Super PACs)
Super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to support or oppose candidates, as long as they do not coordinate directly with the campaigns. This has led to a surge in outside spending, often overshadowing the candidates' own fundraising efforts.
Dark Money
Another significant factor is the rise of dark money, where donors contribute to nonprofit organizations that are not required to disclose their contributors. These nonprofits can then spend money on political campaigns, making it difficult to trace the source of the funds. Dark money has become a major player in local elections, allowing wealthy donors to influence outcomes without public scrutiny.
The Need for Campaign Finance Reform
The increasing influence of big-money donors in local elections undermines the democratic process and raises concerns about the fairness and integrity of these elections. To address this issue, comprehensive campaign finance reform is essential.
Examples of possible solutions include:
Public Financing of Elections: Implementing public financing systems, where candidates receive public funds for their campaigns in exchange for agreeing to spending limits and transparency requirements, can help level the playing field. New York City’s matching funds program is a prime example, providing public funds to candidates who raise small contributions from local donors.
Stronger Disclosure Requirements: Enhancing disclosure requirements for all political contributions, including those made to Super PACs and dark money organizations, can increase transparency and accountability. Voters have a right to know who is funding political campaigns and influencing their local elections.
Instituting Contribution Limits: Imposing stricter limits on campaign contributions for local elections can prevent wealthy donors from having outsized influence. This includes capping the amount individuals and organizations can donate directly to candidates and independent expenditure groups, as was recently accomplished in Denver, Colorado, when their new campaign finance law went into effect on January 1, 2024. This law, HB23-1245, limits the amount that donors can contribute and tightens reporting requirements.
Independent Organizations Pushing Reform: Organizations like GoodParty.org are leading the charge for campaign finance reform. GoodParty.org supports people-powered, anti-corruption candidates at the local level, advocating for policies that reduce the influence of big money in politics.
The Brennan Center for Justice has also created a Money in Politics toolkit to help state and local lawmakers draft reform measures to mitigate the influence of big money in state and local elections. This tool seeks to address the issue of exorbitant spending by strengthening laws and regulations in the areas of:
Coordination
Disclosure
Foreign Spending
Internet Advertising
Office-Holder Controlled Non-Profits
Public Financing of Elections
By championing transparency, accountability, and public financing, the independent movement aims to restore integrity to local elections and ensure that the voices of ordinary citizens are heard.
Final Thoughts
The growing influence of big-money donors in local elections is a troubling trend that threatens the foundations of democracy. As cities across the United States experience unprecedented levels of campaign spending, it is crucial to implement reforms that promote transparency, accountability, and fairness.
By supporting initiatives like public financing, stronger disclosure requirements, and contribution limits, we can mitigate the influence of wealthy donors and ensure that local elections truly represent the will of the people. GoodParty.org's commitment to supporting anti-corruption candidates is a vital step in this direction, offering hope for a more democratic and equitable political landscape.
When we’re empowered to stop the rising tide of big money in local elections, we can take significant strides towards creating a political system that truly serves the interests of all citizens, not just the wealthy few.
For more information on how you can support campaign finance reform and people-powered, anti-corruption independent candidates at the local level, join us in the independent movement. You can also keep the conversation going on our Discord server.
Photo by Giorgio Trovato on Unsplash
Fed up with politics as usual?
Frequently Asked Questions
