David Greenberg, “Accentuating the Negative”

1. David Greenberg, “Accentuating the Negative”

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq7kBcA5q1w Palin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gccofwmEiGI short Obama http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnkI0lyIzcc longer Obama http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHFREDHB-nQ Obama as Muslim http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07u6uffKvpA Hillary on hard work for change http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9LhWUsrJnM Hillary on LBJ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1Ytbr-7VaE Bill Clinton fairy tale Lipstick on a pig

3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58bHIwDRx_w Romney ad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rsGMM_XPLE Obama response http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOyDR2b71ag Warren “you didn’t build that” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiXnr8Ou_EM Obama “you didn’t build that” 2012 out of context

4. Dukakis on crime http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io9KMSSEZ0Y&NR=1 Obama on McCain’s healthcare plan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OzxuFnqhSE Max Cleland ad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJGAWT90Xl4 Saxby Chambliss ad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0baIxdp-xEA&feature=related More negative ads

5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEPlZYp5-Pk Positive advertising

6. Reduces voter turnout Reduces faith in government Tends to mobilize conservatives while demobilizing liberals Negative advertising

7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXXcaGNY1yc Lewis on Clinton John Lewis, Congressman of Georgia

8. “Hence ignorance of politics is not a result of unpatriotic apathy; rather it is a highly rational response to the facts of political life in a large democracy.” If a voter believes there is no difference between candidate A and candidate B, or party A and party B, is it rational for them to believe that the casting of a vote will make a difference in how they are governed? Samuel L. Jackson “Wake the f*&k up! In 2008, Obama used the tried and true message of “change” to convince voters that he would be different and was able to mobilize youth and the marginalized. Anthony Downs and the rational voter

9. The opening segment highlights the difficulties faced by candidates who move from the extremes of their own party to a general election. In Chapter 12 we found Akin and Mourdock who opposed abortion in the case of rape as having views that were too extreme for the general election. When asked if the far right positions taken during the primary would hurt Romney in the general election, a Romney spokesman replied, “Well, I think you hit a reset button for the fall campaign. Everything changes. It’s almost like an Etch-A-Sketch. You can kind of shake it up and restart all of over again.” The things that were said by Mitt Romney in the primary elections were quickly forgotten once he had the nomination and donned the cloak of “Moderate Mitt”. This caught Barak Obama off guard in the first debate when Romney had his first of many Etch-a-sketch moments. Chapter 13 The campaign process

10. In 2008 -29 incumbent Senators raised $9.7 million on average. • Look at the difference between a contested seat versus a safe seat. • Harry Reid (D) $24,815,104 Sharron E. Angle (R) $28,162,049 • Max Baucus (D) $11,602,479 Bob Kelleher (R) $0Mark Pryor (D) $5,943,688 unopposed by a Republican • Data from opensecrets.org Raising money Harry Reid became whip in 2001, became leader 2005 http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?id=MAS1&cycle=2012

11. 1883 – prohibit solicitation of political funds from federal workers. Remember, Chester Arthur had had a lucrative federal job for which he “paid” the Republican Party through political donations. It was 1881 when Garfield had been shot by a Republican who had not been able to get one of these government jobs. This ended the era of government jobs for sale. Campaign finance reform

12. Tillman Act (1907), the Corrupt Practices Act (1910, 1911, 1925), all of these occurred during the Lochner era with a very business friendly Supreme Court, yet none were found to be unconstitutional. Hatch Act (1939) and Taft-Hartley Act (1947) all attempting to limit the corrupting influence of campaign spending. Seek to keep the government as acting autonomous without a conflict of interest in order to do what is right for the country Further legislation in the 1970s up to 2002. The Citizen’s United ruling unraveled 100 years of legislation intended to limit corruption in government. In terms of judicial restraint/activism this ruling shows no deference to the legislature and completely ignores stare decisis. Perspective on Citizen’s United

13. Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) disclosure requirements, public funding of presidential candidates and the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) issue advocacy ads cannot be aired within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days from a general election. Hard money: campaign contributions that are regulated by the FEC. Usually given directly to the campaign, must be disclosed, limits to amount per individual, campaign controls its usage. Soft money: not regulated by the FEC. Usually goes to issue advocacy, donations not regulated, candidate does not control. New rules

14. Example of soft money: Three millionaires give a total of $10 million to the “issue advocacy” group “Swiftboat Veterans for Truth”. Although the sole purpose of the group is to prevent John Kerry from defeating George Bush in the 2004 election, this group met the qualifications of an issue advocacy group so their fund-raising was neither limited nor regulated. It did not mention George Bush’s name, but it did mention John Kerry’s name. Follow the logic: If positive advertising about your own candidate is heavily regulated while negative issue advocacy ads about the opponent are relatively unregulated, what should we expect to see more of in the future? Soft money consequences

15. The BCRA actually doubled campaign donation limits and adjusts the amount allowed to inflation. While it doubles the amount that can be given directly to a candidate, it only increases the amount that can be given to a party by 50%, further decreasing the power of political parties. Consider the before and after individual contribution limits. ($50,000 - $115,000) For most Americans, the maximum levels for campaign donations are way outside of their budget constraints. This new rule will have its largest effect on donations by the wealthy. Top 1% = $368,238 (20.9% of income) Top 0.5% = $558,726 (16.8% of income) Top 0.1% = $1,695,136 (10.3% of income) Top 0.01% = $9,141,190 (5% of income) Current individual contribution limits under the BCRA for 2012 was $117,000. Sheldon Adelson donated over $30 million to Republican candidates and campaigns in the 2012 election. Campaign donation limits

16. 2003 :McConnell v. FEC upholds the BCRA • 2006: Sandra Day O’Connor (Reagan appointee who had voted to uphold BCRA) retires and is replaced by Samuel Alito. • 2007: Limits on issue advocacy ads overturned • 2008: Overturns limits on candidate’s own money used • 2010: Overturns ban on electioneering communications by corporations • 2010 elections: businesses and corporations spend $2 billion on midterm elections • Many state legislatures become Republican monopolies following 2010. Republican legislatures gerrymander in redistricting and pass laws making it harder to vote. • June 24, 2010, Democratic House passes HR 5175 the DISCLOSE Act would have required more corporate disclosure and banned donations from foreign-owned companies and government contractors. Filibustered twice in the Senate. Supreme court weighs in

17. We have talked before about the fact that legislation is often the result of negotiations in which an amendment a Congressman does not like is often tolerated to get something that is good overall passed. Consider that the increase in contribution limits was something that was added to get approval for more strict regulation of how that money could be used. By striking down the provisions limiting usage and not the law as a whole, the Supreme Court has effectively utilized a line-item veto on the BCRA, keeping those provisions that increase donation levels while eliminating provisions that restricted its use. Consider the BCRA

18. Political parties have a substantial interest in keeping candidates closer to the ideological center while whipping up the base further to the extremes. With the loss of control over candidate selection and discipline, we find parties moving further to the extremes. The national party can only give $5,000 to House candidates and $42,000 to Senate candidates. How much influence would the party have with a candidate spending $1 million, $10 million, $45 million? Political parties

19. Initially developed for coordinating political efforts of concerned citizens regarding an issue. By donating to a PAC which can then distribute the money to where it will do the most good, donors avoid duplication of efforts or possibly placing money where it might be less effective. It has become a way for corporations to legally pool their resources to influence elections and policy. Political action committees (pacs)

20. Leadership PACs are a way for parties to get around the limits of party giving. A congressman sets up a PAC from which he can distribute funds to members of his party at the larger dollar limit that a PAC provides. This gives significant power to legislators who are able to raise significant funds with which to share their largesse with cooperative peers. Member PAcs

21. Personal savings

22. Matching funds go to third party candidates only after the votes are counted in November. This either necessitates third party candidates going only off of what they can raise, going into debt to put on a competitive campaign, or limiting third party candidates to those who can self-finance. Public funds

23. Hard money: campaign contributions that are regulated and limited by the Federal Election Commission. Money donated to campaigns, political parties, and PACs that have limits regarding dollar amounts, how it can be used, and disclosure requirements. Soft money: Those that are not regulated in terms of dollar limits and disclosure rules. There may be some regulations depending on whether the group is a 527 or a 501(c). Soft money groups A political question: If Barack Obama knows that he will face unlimited challenges from 527 and 501(c) groups, should he accept public financing that would limit his ability to spend on the campaign? The donations to the Obama campaign would have to be disclosed, the 501 (c) does not.

24. 527s and 501(c)s are both tax-exempt (you and I subsidize them) entities. 527: Created specifically to “raise money for political activities such as voter mobilization and issue advocacy.” 501(c) serve another purpose other than election activity. Recent controversies center around IRS interpretations of the 501 (c) definition. Soft money groups

25. Differences

26. Many organizations had both 527s and 501(c)4s to take advantage of the laws. Since Citizen’s United, 501(c)4s have been dubbed SuperPACs. 527s remain for those organizations that are developed to influence elections. Those organizations that can claim a larger purpose like industry organizations, unions, or the NAACP have shifted to the less regulated 501(c)4 organizations. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/#51872690 Realities

27. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4Zk9YmED48 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=ybImkZ36ITI http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=kcNirEQm1eM&NR=1 Past, present, future?

28. Kennedy-Nixon debates: Those who listened to the debate on radio thought Nixon had won. Those who watched TV thought Kennedy had won. Reagan was a made for TV presidential candidate. Obama used Facebook and Twitter to his advantage while John McCain appeared unable to even send his own e-mails. Ability to use new forms of media

29. Positive ads: Solely about the candidate and what a great guy they are. Negative ads: Attacking the character or positions of an opponent. Contrast ads: Compares the records of the two candidates while portraying the ad sponsor in a more favorable light Inoculation ad: In anticipation of a negative ad from the opponent, seeks to defuse the criticism before it has been made. In recent years this has taken on the mode of accusing the opponent of being weak on something that they are strong on. IE John Kerry’s purple heart criticized by supporters of Bush who sat out the war in the National Guard or accusing a veteran amputee of cowardice when you have no military service record yourself. Campaign ads

30. The real estate market had already gone into a tailspin before the primary campaigns had gotten under way. There was an assumption by much of the media that the next president would be a Democrat and that that president would be Hillary Clinton as she led the polling by 20%. In late 2007, the cost of commodities such as wheat and oil had started to rise, showing severe issues with the American economy, further strengthening the position of the eventual Democratic nominee. 2008 horse race

31. Early on pundits claimed that it would be a “coronation” of Hillary, which she played down. Later in the primary these same pundits accused her of thinking it was going to be a coronation, suggesting she was arrogant enough to believe the presidency should be handed to her. Pundits turn on Hillary