Of, By and For Utahns, Not New Yorkers; Analysis of an Amendment Proposal
Class
Article
Graduation Year
2017
College
College of Humanities and Social Sciences
Department
Political Science Department
Faculty Mentor
Damon Cann
Presentation Type
Poster Presentation
Abstract
If 2016 voters agree on anything, it’s a frustration with the influence of outside money on politics. Senator Bernie Sanders had surprising success in the Democratic primary because, in part, he appealed to voter cynicism with his relentless criticism of the “donor class” and “donor control of politicians.” President-Elect Donald Trump echoed this theme, telling GOP primary voters that he is “not controlled by…donors, special interests” unlike “politicians”. Whether you believe Trump or Sanders are “working for the people”, their success reflects a deep desire by voters to have their policy preferences placed ahead of campaign contributors.
In recent election cycles, New Yorkers have contributed more to Utah Senators than Utahns. So did Californians. Some might ask why campaign donors from NY or CA should have any financial influence who represents Utah in the U.S. Senate? Is there an institutional change that will better align the interests of politicians with their voters?
Obviously, the answer is not more billionaire self-funding candidates. Despite broad popular appeal for reform, efforts to reduce donor influence have stalled. However, what if only registered voters could donate to campaigns? What if an Article V Amendment, ratified by 34 states, made this “constitutional”? It won't solve all our electoral problems, but exactly what effect will it have?
This is our research project's objective. If such an amendment restricts campaign contributions to registered voters, what is the effect on campaigns and governance? How much money would Speaker Ryan raise if limited to registered voters in his Wisconsin CD? Would Utah Senators vote differently on certain issues if he could only raise money from Utahns? Working with my faculty sponsor, Dr. Damon Cann, we will present analysis of the potential effects of such a proposal on our political institutions.
Location
South Atrium
Start Date
4-13-2017 12:00 PM
End Date
4-13-2017 1:15 PM
Of, By and For Utahns, Not New Yorkers; Analysis of an Amendment Proposal
South Atrium
If 2016 voters agree on anything, it’s a frustration with the influence of outside money on politics. Senator Bernie Sanders had surprising success in the Democratic primary because, in part, he appealed to voter cynicism with his relentless criticism of the “donor class” and “donor control of politicians.” President-Elect Donald Trump echoed this theme, telling GOP primary voters that he is “not controlled by…donors, special interests” unlike “politicians”. Whether you believe Trump or Sanders are “working for the people”, their success reflects a deep desire by voters to have their policy preferences placed ahead of campaign contributors.
In recent election cycles, New Yorkers have contributed more to Utah Senators than Utahns. So did Californians. Some might ask why campaign donors from NY or CA should have any financial influence who represents Utah in the U.S. Senate? Is there an institutional change that will better align the interests of politicians with their voters?
Obviously, the answer is not more billionaire self-funding candidates. Despite broad popular appeal for reform, efforts to reduce donor influence have stalled. However, what if only registered voters could donate to campaigns? What if an Article V Amendment, ratified by 34 states, made this “constitutional”? It won't solve all our electoral problems, but exactly what effect will it have?
This is our research project's objective. If such an amendment restricts campaign contributions to registered voters, what is the effect on campaigns and governance? How much money would Speaker Ryan raise if limited to registered voters in his Wisconsin CD? Would Utah Senators vote differently on certain issues if he could only raise money from Utahns? Working with my faculty sponsor, Dr. Damon Cann, we will present analysis of the potential effects of such a proposal on our political institutions.