Fannie Lou Hamer Wouldn’t Like This

The campaign finance compromise that passed Wednesday in the U.S. Senate would only deepen economic and racial inequality in the United States. The contribution-limits amendment to the McCain-Feingold bill would increase the gap between the rich and the poor and between whites and people of color by doubling individual contributions that can be given directly to candidates--so-called “hard” money--from $1,000 to $2,000.

The amendment, if it is allowed to stand in the final bill, would adversely impact all Americans unable or unwilling to contribute large sums of money to politicians or political parties.

Perhaps because the Senate does not look like America, the amendment overlooks important perspectives related to inclusion, participation and representation.

Some senators have asked: “Can we raise enough money?” Others have asked: “Are we infringing on the 1st Amendment rights of the wealthy?” Unfortunately, by pandering to the narrow interests of politicians and those individuals who can make $1,000 contributions under the current system--who make up less than 1% of the population--the amendment overlooks the rights of all other Americans. In a privately funded political system, those who make large contributions have special access to politicians and to the leadership of political parties, and they therefore determine to a much greater degree which candidates will be able to run credible campaigns.

Under the amended McCain-Feingold bill, wealthy individuals would be even more important, and the less wealthy would be even less important. Politicians would give even less attention to less wealthy communities because they have much greater potential for financial support elsewhere.

The contribution-limits amendment also has an adverse impact on people of color. Due in part to past state-sponsored discrimination and to intergenerational transfers of wealth, the net worth for white households is eight times greater than that of African American households and 12 times greater than Latino households. These economic disparities have an impact on the ability of people of color to make political contributions.

In a survey of individual contributors sponsored by the Joyce Foundation, a philanthropic organization, 95% of respondents identified themselves as white, and fewer than 1% identified themselves as people of color. A separate study conducted by Public Campaign found that residents in minority communities are about three times less likely to make contributions than other Americans. The same study determined that the 41 million residents living in minority communities give less money than the 700,000 residents living in the highest-giving communities, which are predominantly white.

These racial disparities in political contributions would only increase under the amended McCain-Feingold bill.

Real campaign finance reform would meet the Fannie Lou Hamer standard, which is named after the legendary African American voting rights champion who worked on a Mississippi cotton plantation for most of her life.

The Fannie Lou Hamer standard asks whether a proposed reform would make the system more fair for someone like Hamer, a poor woman of color. The now-amended McCain-Feingold bill woefully fails this standard. Just like the poll tax, the larger contribution limits under the amended bill only further shut out those in our society who are the most marginalized, the most discounted and the most overlooked.

The contribution-limits amendment also violates the inclusive spirit of one person, one vote as established by the Supreme Court. Higher contribution limits would move us further away from a democratic promise that includes all Americans, regardless of race or wealth.

As long as our democracy is based on money rather than our votes, our government and laws will not reflect America’s true diversity.