CAMPAIGN FINANCE: CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE TOBACCO LOBBY
This research analyzes the effect of the contributions of the tobacco on the presidential campaign and election. The following section covers the underlying policy issue, which is followed by an analysis of the information.
Abuses of the campaign finance system in the United States are common. Attempts to reduce the motivation of policy-makers to engage in actions designed to benefit selected individuals and entities to the exclusion of the majority of American citizens have had only marginal success. Such efforts include restrictions on the level of campaign contributions and restrictions on the source of campaign contributions for elected officials. The efforts also include restrictions on gifts to both elected and appointed public officials (Ballonardo, 2001).
National and local campaign finance laws encourage public officials to align themselves with the policy objectives of business generally, as well as with specific industries and firms. This outcome is hardly surprising, as public officials write the laws. Campaign spending by political action committees (PACs) affiliated with corporations, trade organizations, and corporations without stock combined account for approximately 65 percent of total PAC campaign spending. In contrast, campaign spending by cooperative organizations, labor-affiliates PACs, and non-connected PACs accounts for approximately 35 percent of total PAC campaign expenditures ("Money & politics", 2001).
Most of the campaign expenditures in the 2000 election went for issue advertising, which is largely so-called soft money. Current campaign finance laws include few restrictions on soft money (Bailey, 2000).
The analysis begins with a presentation of data covering contributions of the tobacco lobby during the 2000 presidential campaign. Analysis follows the presentation of data. The table of leading tobacco lobby contributors is on th...