Politicians are Cheap

The 2022 midterm elections are approaching, and the issues that will define this election cycle are becoming clear. Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan appears stuck. Inflation continues to rage, although recent metrics indicate it may be reaching its peak. On Tuesday night, the political world was rocked by the leak of a draft opinion by the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. No matter the specific text of the Court’s June opinion, abortion rights will certainly play a role when voters head to the polls this November.

Despite all these fluid situations, most observers are confident in their predictions about how the midterms will go. The president’s party almost always loses seats in a midterm election. Joe Biden’s low popularity numbers mean that he is particularly vulnerable to these historic forces. Most debates about Democratic performance focus not on if Democrats will lose a branch of Congress but if they will lose either one or two. Any drama left in the midterms has shifted to the Senate, where personality quirks and the role of Donald Trump may lead to a handful of Democratic upsets that prevent the upper chamber from changing hands.

With Democrats in disarray and despair as always, it is important to keep in mind the reasons for their current predicament. Democrats underperformed in 2020, a year when they absolutely had to build up a sizable congressional majority as they defeated an unpopular incumbent. The party is focused in cities and densely populated areas, a recent development which gives it a disadvantage in both the Senate and the Electoral College. Much of Democratic leadership is significantly older than the general population and often seems behind and out-of-touch to voters and activists.

But as always, money plays a clear role. Ever since the 2010 Citizens’ United decision, Republicans have frequently outspent Democrats up and down the ballot. They have formed massive Super PACs that funnel money from corporations and think tanks to ads supporting candidates and issues. Democrats have not caught on as fast to the spending game. They tried to eschew corporate money for several years, relying instead on small-dollar donations and the principled stand of supporting a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. This approach leads to large volumes of spending but poor strategy. For instance, in 2020 a significant percentage of funding went to candidates who excited small-dollar donors but had no realistic chance of victory, while Republicans spent money in a more coordinated manner and were much more successful with their spending efforts.

The underlying factor in this transaction is that, compared to most other complex questions in society, politicians are relatively cheap. The average Senate and House race costs $10.4 million and $1.3 million, respectively. The entire amount spent on the 2020 race for Congress is $2.2 billion. These totals are considerable compared to the median income in the United States. But given the trillions of dollars and world-altering consequences at stake in American congressional elections, the value of buying a member of Congress is immense. The House amount is less than one percent of the net worth of liberal billionaire Tom Steyer. McKenzie Scott’s latest significant donation was as much as the entire Republican Party spent on Senate races in 2020.

Democrats have been unable to fully embrace funding partially due to concerns over hypocrisy and partially due to the overwhelming influence of the 2016 presidential election. That election was one of the few that actually could not be bought by the highest bidder. Both candidates had universal name recognition. Television ads would not work to change the electorate’s opinion of Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Therefore, Clinton’s spending advantage could not overcome the forces that resulted in her defeat. Democrats need to be aware that while large-scale spending did not defeat Donald Trump, it could still overwhelm smaller and lesser-known candidates.

Citizens United will clearly be the law of the land for the foreseeable future. Democrats have improved in their ability to embrace small-dollar donors and pool their resources since 2016. They need to do more during the next decade to focus these funds into stronger state party structures and more competitive races. Effective campaigning, spending, and fundraising can help the party win the majorities they will eventually need to pass substantive reforms that cannot be vetoed by the quirks of a 50–50 Senate split.