Don't hesitate to comment below if you have any questions or additional phrases
The Politics of the
Internet –
Week FiveOverview How is the Internet affecting domestic politics?
Traditional topics of political science – who wins and loses elections.
Elections in 2004 and
2006 provide some interesting insights – first time that
Internet campaigning really took off at national level. 2008 is too early to predict – but some interesting insights nonetheless. ,The Politics of the Internet – Week FiveWill the Internet transform politics?
Two weeks ago – how libertarians (on the right) got key aspects of the Internet wrong.
This week – how some on the left (supporters of
Howard Dean and the
Democratic party) got it wrong in 2004. But (as with the libertarians) – were wrong in interesting ways, and
point to important phenomena. And to what may work better in this election cycle ,The Politics of the Internet – Week Five What are the key ways in which the Internet might affect electoral politics?
Fundraising
Organization Transaction Costs and
Feedback Loops How did the Internet affect
Election 2004 Dean campaign
MoveOn, Meetup etc
Ultimate results
Lessons for current election ,The Politics of the Internet – Week FiveFundraising - background
Political fundraising in
US politics has traditionally been a vexed topic.
Brings two basic principles of democracy into conflict with each other.
On the one hand – equality of access should create a political system that is open for all. On other – free speech should allow people to voice opinions – and donate money to causes that they favor. ,The Politics of the Internet – Week FiveGeneral Parameters of fundraising Previous history –
Buckley versus Valeo set clear limits on the ability of
Congress to make laws affecting expenditure on politics.
Supreme Court has privileged freedom of speech over equality of access. Some limits allowed – but very hard to regulate.
Various efforts to change the system have been stymied. ,The Politics of the Internet – Week FiveExpanding role of money
Current system provides matching funds to candidates for ‘hard money’ donations up to a certain amount – ( details outside the scope of this class).
But role of money in US politics has continued to increase. Expenses of organizing,
TV advertising etc etc. ,The Politics of the Internet – Week FiveEfforts to ban soft money Most recent effort – bilateral reform bill sponsored by
John McCain and
Russ Feingold
Sought to limit role of “soft money” (money that was raised under less stringent rules).
Banned raising of soft money at national level.
Barred explicit coordination between national parties and ‘527’ independent organizations. Increased the limits for the amount of ‘hard money’ that individuals could contribute. ,
Results of
Campaign Laws Difficulties for parties in coordinating their message with outside groups.
Difficulty in one part of the party coordinating with another. Possible for presidential campaigns that have accepted funding to have jointly funded ads with
RNC/
DNC through complicated arrangements.
But hard to coordinate the content of these ads for legal reasons. ,The Politics of the Internet – Week FiveEffects on
Democrats Widely predicted that McCain-Feingold was a “suicide bill” for the Democratic party.
Democrats were heavily reliant on soft money donations. Poor record in appealing to, and getting contributions from smaller donors. Wide belief that they would get hammered by
Republicans in fundraising in 2004. ,The Politics of the Internet – Week FiveOrganization
Grassroots organization has to some extent been replaced by TV advertising and direct marketing as a means of appealing to voters.
But still retains considerable value. Allows parties to appeal directly to voters, and to persuade them in ways that aren’t possible on TV Also to get supporters to polling booths. ,The Politics of the Internet – Week FiveParameters of political organization
Again, election law shapes possibilities for act
- published: 21 May 2016
- views: 1