Equity v. Efficiency: Federal Campaign Financing Regulations
This paper will examine the issue of equity versus efficiency with regards to the federal campaign financing regulations. In particular, the discussion will focus on whether the debate concerning equity v. efficiency really applies to this subject, how efficiency is or should be defined in this context, and whether the current regulations promote either efficiency or equity.
The first question which must be asked is whether the debate over equity v. efficiency is applicable to the context of campaign funding regulations. Efficiency is typically defined as the state in which there can be no change, in order to make someone better off, without making someone else worse off. Frequently, actions which are efficient, increasing the size of the "pie," distribute the individual "slices" unequally, sometimes even decreasing the size of an individual "slice." This action thus affects equity, the fairness of distribution. In order to achieve equity, all shares need not be equal; an allocation is equitable if no individual envies another's share. The frequent object of law, often accomplished at the expense of efficiency, is to achieve equity. The types of laws which are discussed most often in the context of efficiency v. equity are those which directly affect economic interests and relationships.
The subject area of this paper, however, may not directly involve an economic relationship between two or more parties. Individuals running for public office are not necessarily seeking to increase the size of their own economic share; many may be seeking to increase the total size of society's economic "pie." The question, therefore, is what is efficiency in this context? Efficiency might be electing the individual who can best increase the size of the "pie." But this information cannot be known with certainty in most elections; the electors will usually be divided in their opinions...