Money in politics

When I ran for Congress, the Republican Men’s Club for Bexar County refused to let me participate in their candidates’ debate because, in their opinion, my candidacy was not adequately viable.  I asked how they determined viability, and they told me to go pound sand.  In the end, I learned that they were correct (I was 4^th in a 5-person race, and received only 7% of the vote), but I never learned how they reached that conclusion without the benefit of any polling.  I do know that the two candidates who made the run-off spent about $200,000 each and the third-place candidate spent about $25,000, while I spent only $15,000.  

Is money/name-recognition everything in politics today?  The Libertarian Party of Texas seems to think so.  While reviewing their website, I learned that they have three categories of campaigns:

1. Placeholder campaign – costs virtually nothing in money or time; does not actively campaign; gives Libertarians a chance to vote for a Libertarian.
2. Educational campaign – appears at candidate forums; responds to questionnaires; may produce a website, brochures, or business cards.
3. Winnable campaigns – call for more information.

My campaign fit into the category of an educational campaign.  I appeared at forums, created a website, brochures, and business cards.  But I didn’t have the money to do a lot of direct mailings, robo-calls, billboards, or TV/radio ads.  My opponents did. 

I urged in my campaign brochure that the voters should not reward candidates who had sold themselves to special interests for large amounts of money to advertize, but this message was not successful.  A major obstacle to making this argument, in addition to not having any money to communicate it, was that the media provided almost no free press.  I had been optimistic that, because congressional races are important and because my district was recognized as one of two swing districts in Texas, there would be newspaper coverage of important campaign issues, but there wasn’t.  When I provided the media with proof that outside interests were funding the campaigns of my opponents, they responded with a collective yawn.  Any voter who was depending on newspapers/TV/radio to help them make an educated vote was completely disappointed.  There was virtually no free coverage.

Elections have not always been this way.  In the book, A Patriot’s History of the United States, the authors described elections when the parties “relied on ideology – the person’s philosophy or worldview – to produce votes.”  Then, in the 1820’s, they began relying “on a much more crass principle, patronage.”  It seems that money has been the mother’s milk of politics since then. 

As for me, I will continue tilting against windmills by pursuing political objectives without pursuing money.  I dream of the day when a political campaign is a battle of substance instead of crass marketing.