www.JohnForUSSenate.com
Study shocker: Most politicians can't
be 'bribed' by campaign contributions.
Why should it be "against the law" for a person to express his or her political views by contributing
more than $1,000 to the candidate of their choice? It's not campaign contributions that are the problem. The problem is allowing politicians to pass laws that are clearly unconstitutional. The Libertarian Party is the only viable political party running candidates who believe in constitutional principles.If elected, I would work hard to repeal these unconstitutional campaign finance laws so that
more grass roots candidates like myself can
enter the political process.John
----------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON, DC -- Surprise: Politicians can't be bought and
sold like cans of tuna fish. At least, that's the eye-opening conclusion of a new scientific
study which convincingly proves that campaign contributions do not
influence the votes of most politicians. And that's why legislation like the McCain-Feingold campaign
finance "reform" bill -- which would sharply limit or prohibit campaign
contributions from individuals or PACs -- is not needed, the
Libertarian Party said today. "Politicians may lie, cheat, and steal -- but they apparently
don't take bribes in the form of campaign contributions," said Steve
Dasbach, the party's national director. "So people like Senator John
McCain, who think big money is corrupting politics, are dead wrong when
they say Americans should be prohibited from supporting the candidate
of their choice with a generous contribution." In a study recently publicized in Investor's Business Daily,
John Lott of the Yale University School of Law and Steve Bronars of the
University of Texas found that campaign contributions have almost no
effect on how politicians vote. Using an innovative approach, Lott and Bronars studied the
voting records of U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives from 1975-1990
who had announced they would retire -- and then compared them to the
politicians' previous voting habits. "[A retiring politician] has little reason to honor any bribes,
for re-election is no longer an issue," noted Lott. "Therefore, if
contributions are 'bribes' to make politicians vote differently from
his beliefs, there ought to be a change in the voting record when a
politician decides to retire." But that wasn't the case, the study revealed. Liberated from
the need to collect campaign contributions to get re-elected, and free
from any big-money contributor pressures, politicians changed their
votes on less than 1% of the issues. "According to voting records, politicians stay steadfastly
consistent in how they vote," reported Lott. "The voting data indicate
that politicians are voting according to their beliefs" and not
according to campaign contributions. In fact, retiring politicians changed their voting habits on
just one issue out of every 450, the study found -- and then it was
usually to vote in favor of the interests of their former contributors. "What this study demonstrates is that money follows ideology,"
said Dasbach. "Contributors give money to politicians who agree with
them already; they don't give money to try to change politicians'
minds, or to try to win support. The Lott/Bronars study is a compelling
argument against the notion that big money is somehow corrupting
politicians." But there are also other reasons why the so-called campaign
finance crisis doesn't require a legislative solution, said Dasbach. "The typical Congressional candidate spends only $1 per voter
during a campaign," he noted. "Overall Congressional campaign spending
actually fell from 1996 to 1998. And only 3% of Americans rank campaign
finance reform as an issue they care about. So, there's no need to try
to solve this non-crisis by making it a crime to contribute money to
politicians who share your political ideology." Well, if politicians' votes aren't being bought by big-money
interests, does that mean Libertarians approve of those votes? Not at all, said Dasbach. "The fact that politicians are not being bribed doesn't make
the votes of most Congressional Republicans and Democrats any better,"
he said. "They consistently vote to reduce the economic and personal
liberty of Americans, to dole out more corporate welfare, and to meddle
in the affairs of other nations. Even if they're not guilty of
accepting bribes, most of their votes are still a crime. It's just not
a crime that campaign finance reform will fix."