« Stands of Big Pines as a Museums | Main | Parkinson's testimony »
August 26, 2008
The Modern Parallel to the Rotten Borough
. . . many candidates who represent places in the United States without much disposable income raise the millions necessary to run for office these days.Increasingly, they’re not bothering to ask the folks whom they are actually paid to represent for campaign cash. Instead, they are flocking to a handful of super-wealthy ZIP codes in places like Hollywood; the Upper East Side of Manhattan; Greenwich, Conn.; and suburban Washington, D.C. - the "political ATM's" of the campaign trial.
While one can find occasional media coverage of these kinds of high-dollar fundraisers, a recent study by three political scientists is the first to document the extent to which congressional candidates of both parties now depend on out-of-district donors to help them finance their campaigns.According to an analysis by University of Maryland political science professors James G. Gimpel and Frances E. Lee and graduate student Shanna Pearson-Merkowitz, as of 2004, more than 2 out of 3 U.S. House campaign contributions (70.2 percent) came from somewhere outside the district. That’s a steady increase from 54.5 percent in 1996 and 63 percent in 2000.
Moreover, as of 2004, only 1 in 5 congressional districts provided the majority of contributions for the candidates seeking to represent that district. And in 18 percent of congressional districts, more than 90 percent of money now comes from out of district.
The professors write in their analysis that the new donor class is “disproportionately wealthy, urban, highly educated, and employed in elite occupations.”
One of my indulgences this summer was watching The Pallisers on DVD and reading up again on the Reform Act of 1867, especially about some of the unintended consequences of rising campaign expenses. Campaign inequity has always been with us. The article linked above is an interesting version, though. I'm reminded of Plantey Pall, hat in hand, talking to his uncle the Duke of Omnium about being handed a family-controlled seat in the House of Commons, in exactly the way the gentry and nobility of England controlled who served as rectors in Anglican parishes. I'm not at all certain is was more or less corrupt than the system which came after it.
via Instapundit.
Posted by CrankyProfessor at August 26, 2008 7:45 PM