Political Campaigns

Student’s Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Political Campaigns
Americas have always been certain of the election date since the US Congress instituted the election date in 1845.The certainty of the date offers political parties, and independent candidates adequate time to prepare for elections. Within a period of two years before the general elections, several electoral activities take place to subject candidates to various processes which culminate in their nomination to vie for various seats. Although the Constitution allows eligible aspirants to vie as independent candidates, a majority of political offices in the country are held by either Democrats or Republicans .For presidential candidates, the process is more complicated. Due to the complexity of the nomination process and the vastness of the Union, aspiring candidates must gather adequate resources so as to devise the best strategies that would enable them to secure the nominations as flag bearers for the two major political parties. The paper will explore campaign financing in the US elections, the role of the media in elections, and the role of modern technologies in political campaigns.
A.CAMPAIGN FINANCE IN THE UNITED STATES
Money matters so much in elections as it enables the campaigners to spread the message to the masses as can be seen in the massive reelection of incumbents (Lasson 7). Campaign finances in the US, like other developed democracies, play a significant role in facilitating the activities of campaign teams across the country.

These efforts require huge sums of money for them to achieve the influence needed to for their respective candidates to succeed in the elections. The campaigns receive finances from various sources depending on the preferences of the candidates. Wealthy capitalists, large corporations, and ordinary individuals make donations to the politicians as a show of goodwill. Candidates can also obtain financing from government subsidies though such sources of finance have ceilings that must be observed especially those that receive government subsidies (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2016).However, the Federal Electoral Commission (2016) indicates that the Obama administration enacted a law that barred parties from receiving public financing in regards to the presidential nomination conventions. This legislation attempts to address some of the concerns that have been raised in regards to the funding of campaigns, especially during the nomination process.
In spite of the few variations, states legislatures have electoral laws that regulate expenditures in political campaigns. The laws spell out the rules and regulations of that guide candidates regarding the amount, manner, and purpose for which such funds would be used during electioneering periods with the aim of promoting accountability and transparency. According to Blake (4 Feb, 2012), the laws that regulate expenditures during elections and campaigns have origins in the 1971 Watergate scandal. The scandal revealed deliberate manipulations of the electoral process through donations of corporate companies and wealthy capitalists. In the scandal, business leaders made secret donations to Nixon’s campaigns in anticipation of favorable treatment from his government.
How States Regulate Campaign Finances
Public Financing versus Private Financing
Currently, 13 states provide financial resources to election candidates but under certain requirements. Those candidates that opt for public financing are subjected to some degree of regulation. The option allows aspirants to receive money from the public coffers in exchange for a commitment to limit the amount of money they spend not only the election but also the amount of donation they can receive from private entities (Federal Election Commission, 2016). This regulation instills modest in expenditures in political campaigns. On the other hand, candidates who opt out of the public financing are permitted to solicit funds from various sources. Such sources may include unions, their parties, corporations, individual voters, and Political Action Committees (PACs), among others (Blake 4 Feb, 2012).
Contribution Limits
As part of the regulation caps on expenditures, 12 states impose restrictions on the financial resources a single individual can donate to a given candidate. Also, restrictions are imposed on the amount of money a state party can contribute towards a particular candidate. In this respect, state parties are required to observe ceilings set out by the state laws.18 states have enacted such laws. Moreover, some states prohibit contributions from corporate institutions towards election campaigns while others do not impose any restrictions on the corporate donations (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2016)
Disclosure Requirements
The law requires that the money raised and spent during elections and campaigns for elective public positions. Disclosure requirements inform much of the regulations that guide the conduct of the US elections (Blake 4 Feb , 2012).According to Blake, the requirements obligate the candidate to file periodic returns to the Federal Electoral Commission revealing the amount of money raised and spent during a particular electioneering period. Disclosure requirements are meant to instill transparency in the electoral process as well as deter any form of manipulations.
How the Campaign Money is Utilized
Political Action Committees (PACs)
PACs have an important role in influencing election outcomes. These committees can be term as private group entities that are responsible for the selection of candidates to advance a certain political issue .The PACs are charged with raising money for political campaigns as well overseeing how such funds are used in during the campaigns. According to Lasson (1-2), PACs came into existence as a result of a series of legislations on campaign conduct which aimed at minimizing the influence of corporations and other wealthy capitalists on election outcomes. The amount of money a single PAC can contribute to a candidate is capped at $ 15,000. The money can be put into various activities restricted election to campaigns. For instance, the contributions can be used to run advertisements on televisions, radio stations and other channels of advertising. This shows that despite the provisions of the election laws on campaign money should be-beised; safeguards have been instituted to ensure that spending in elections and political campaigns comply with non-partisan standards.

The Super Political Action Committees (Super PACs)
The super PACs entry in electoral campaigns and elections was as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision in 2010 that allowed more participation in congressional elections. The difference between PACs and super PACs is manifested in the involvement in the competitive races and the amount of the expenditures in the campaigns (Lasson 4). Lasson notes that super PACs have evolved to neutralize the effects of the stringent regulations on party committees. The new avenues offer candidates and parties an opportunity to utilize outside spending in the campaigns in a manner that avoids fundraising limits set out by the electoral laws.
The role of super PACs in congressional elections is also far much different from that of the traditional PACs (Lasson 6). According to Lasson, they focus more on the political outcomes of the candidate than that of the party with which the candidate is affiliated (7).As a result, they have recorded more impact on the election outcomes than the traditional PACs.
Other Lobby Groups
These are groups of persons that go round the region in which their candidates seek to represent with the aim of popularizing the aspirants through various activities. They sensitize voters on the policies and ideals of the candidate so as to win their support .The lobby groups also seek to educate voters on the need to register and vote as well as enlist some of the voters that have not been registered. Moreover, the lobby groups encourage more voters to join the groups as a way of increasing their numbers for more coverage of the regions of interest (Lasson 2-9). These efforts ensure that the aspiring candidates have been well-popularized before the elections date.
Campaign Finance Issues in US Elections
In the recent past, the cost of carrying out campaigns in the country has increased significantly .This situation can be seen in the just-concluded elections. Presidential contender, Hilary Clinton and President-elect Donald Trump, received support from more than 40 fundraising committees and lobby groups (Ginger and Gibson 9 Nov, 2016). Although official figures for the campaigns have not been released, available records indicate that the committees and other lobby groups raised billions of dollars in campaign finances (The Economist 7 March, 2016).The Economist estimated that the expenditures in the 2016 campaigns would cost the candidates at least $5 billion in terms of candidate campaigns, political parties expenditures, and outside groups action costs. This value is almost more than twice of the campaign expenditures in the 2012 general elections.
Research and raw literature have shown that many Americans desire for a reduction in money spent on the campaigns. They want more stringent rules enacted to regulate expenditures in elections, but such attempts have become difficult to implement considering the nature of the constitution system of the United States (Lasson 2-9; Cantor 3). Evidence also suggests that campaigns elections can be effectively conducted in a leaner financial environment so as to reduce cases of corruption and manipulation in elections. According to Gibson and Smith (Nov 9, 2016), the Trump campaign team spend much less amount of money in the recent general elections compared to the Clinton team, yet they recorded the victory. This result shows that, with proper regulation, less amount of money can be used in campaigns and elections. As a result, elections would be more credible and also would enable the right candidates (especially those with little financial resources) to succeed in elections.

Bundling
Although bundling has existed in some form in the US elections and campaigns decades, the practice has become more pronounced in the 21st century (Ginger and Gibson Nov 9, 2016).The practice involves the collection of money from various donors by an intermediate agent that represents the interests of a particular candidate. For this reason, PACs may raise funds from ‘well-wishers’ which is more than the legal limits of such PACs (Cantor 8).The amount of money that is not utilized may be subjected to abuse or be used to promote partisan politics. Such scenarios have the potential to lead to corruption and poor election outcomes.
Soft Money
Soft money denotes that money which is likely to influence the outcomes of the Federal elections, but the manner of mobilization and expenditure of such financial resources does not meet the provisions of the Federal laws (Cantor 8).When unions, corporate institutions, and individual voters donate such funds that contradict Federal statutes, issues of manipulations and corruption are bound to happen.
B.ROLE OF THE MEDIA IN ELECTIONS
Today, most social activities take place in the media as various institutions and organizations reshape to align themselves with the new avenues of social interactions (Shoemaker and Reese x).The effect has not left politics behind. Media coverage of campaigns in the modern era has continued to play a significant role in influencing election outcomes. Through the media, the voters get to know the various candidates that are being discussed in regards to a given election cycle (Ginger and Gibson 9 Nov , 2016).However, the role of the media is much broader in so far as the individual candidates, the electorate, and the media houses are concerned.
Setting the Election Agenda
The media, through its content, sets the tone for an election through a series of programming that intends to present certain issues to public for assessment and decision making(McCombs 1-2). Through expert opinions and analysis of the policies that are being presented by the various candidates, the media outlets educate the general public on the suitability of such candidates based on the attractiveness of their respective policies. McCombs (6) notes that in 1996, the Spanish media run correspondences that meant to project the agenda of the leaders of the three main political parties which was crucial in the determination of the outcome of the election of that year. This way, the public who have limited knowledge concerning the policies presented by the candidates can make voting decisions that would ensure their interests are well-represented. The process also helps the electorate in the screening of the aspirants which, in turn, may lead to better decisions at the ballot, increasing the chances of better leadership in their respective jurisdictions.

Perception is an essential element of agenda-setting by various media outlets .Emphasis on certain issues by media outlets creates a perception which, in turn, makes the public develop concern about those issues (McCombs 5-13). As a result, continued emphasis on issues during an electioneering period creates a difference in how people view such matters which is vital in the process of making decisions about aspirants. As McCombs (5-7) explains, the media presentation of issues creates images in the minds of the voters regarding particular issues which make the public to interrogate such images and form opinions. According to McCombs’ findings, responses of the public in regards to campaign issues show that such responses mirror on the patterns of coverage that the newspapers, televisions, radios and magazines (7) follow. This shows that the discussions of journalists in the media help the public to understand the important issues that should be addressed by the candidates in an election cycle. The public realizes that due to the current socioeconomic environment, certain issues require more attention than others .Hence, they are better-placed to evaluate the credentials of politicians and make informed choices.
Voters also engage the media outlets in a series of interviews and opinions as a way of obtaining public perceptions about the social, economic and political issues affecting the country. From the feedback of the public, media houses moderate this information and present them same to a wider audience with the intention of creating more awareness (McCombs 3-13).From this responses, journalists can determine the concerns and needs of the populace that need to be addressed by the politicians who are vying for political offices. Such media activities can sway public opinion and, as a result, influence the voting patterns of voters.
Promotion or Antagonism of Aspirants
Through media advertisements, aspirants disseminate information to the public on the various issues that they intend to tackle if elected. Policies are articulated through short ads that run on prime news times so as to capture most viewers. These ads serve several purposes. For one, they pass messages that articulate the personality of the person who is vying for a given position. In effect, voters become more aware of the aspirants and their policies. This way, the public assess the qualifications of a candidate and make choices with the help of other media discussions that set the agenda for which the particular candidate represents. Furthermore, advertisements are used to discredit the policies of certain candidates in regards to the effects of their policies (mostly if such candidates are incumbents) on the socio-economic lives of the people .As McCombs (7) finds, ads tend to lean towards the personality of the individuals so as to sway the opinions of the voters towards such candidates. The Clinton-Lewinsky scandal can be regarded as one of those media ads and media-instigated agenda that intended to portray a negative picture of the incumbent but failed to work against Clinton. The electorate rejected the message as an irreverent since the president had done well on governance (McCombs 8). The incident shows that voters may reject some adverts if they are well-informed of the governance issues of the candidates that are being aired in anti-campaign ads.
Reporting
The media plays the traditional role of reporting the events of elections and campaign outcomes. They scrutinize the electoral process and evaluate the inclusiveness of the process (McCombs 3-7). For instance, the incidents where voters were struck off the register in North Carolina were made public through the media. Such information is crucial to the public and other election interest bodies for them to assess the process and devise ways of addressing such incidents in the future elections. Also, the media monitors the voting process and reports the results of the elections to the public to ensure the citizens are kept abreast of the latest information regarding the performance of their respective candidates (Ginger and Gibson 9 Nov , 2016).This can also be seen in the reliance of CNN and other media outlets to give projections of the elections. As a result, citizens get the information on the election results without much wait for the electoral bodies to make announcements.
C.ROLE MODERN TECHNOLOGIES IN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS
Smartphones and Social Media
Technology has led to a paradigm shift in the ways that elections and campaigns are conducted in the US. Communications between campaign teams, candidates, and the American people has moved away from boardroom discussions to social media (Patterson 15 Dec, 2015). As of the year 2012, at least 80% of adults used social media and at least 66% of the social media users were connected to online sites (Hwang 10). Specifically, voters can access the websites of the candidates and get the latest updates on campaign developments and schedules. Through the development of the smartphone technologies, candidates and voters interact through social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook (Singer and Duhigg 7 Oct, 2012). Although the Obama campaign is widely employed YouTube, Twitter and Facebook in 2008 and 2012 to register great milestones in the campaign trail, the ubiquity of smartphone technologies has changed the effectiveness of the social media platforms ( Hwang 14-24).By the aid of smartphones, voters get real-time updates on the progress of the campaigns as well as monitor the release of the election results through tweets and Facebook posts of the contenders and their teams( Hwang 10-11;14-24).This is made possible by the current generation of phones that stream live mainstream media coverage of events as they unfold.
The smartphone technologies also enable action committees and other lobby groups to raise funds from various sources through online social platforms and payment channels. The gadgets allow easy access to the Internet which provides several services in regards to connectivity and communication. On the same note, advocacy groups mobilize voters through social medial as well as use smartphones to send pictures of the live events of political rallies and advocacy meetings (Hwang 4-10). This kind of communication ensures that there is smooth and effective communication between the various teams that run campaigns.
Social media platforms have made viewership and consumption of political news to shift from the mainstream media such as television, radio, and newspapers, among others (Hwang 31). According to Hwang, campaign teams spend billions of dollars to direct ad content to social media platforms (31). Candidates also use the social media platforms to insult and criticize their opponents so as to provoke conversations among voters. This was evident with Trump as evidenced when he tweeted a photo of Republican nominee hopeful, Jeb Bush, with controversial references in November 2015(Hwang 34).All these opportunities of the social media technologies keep candidates, campaign teams, opponents and voters engaged with each other throughout the campaign.
Cloud computing has taken a gradual entrance into elections and political campaigns .Parties and candidates employ statistical scientists whose job is to run complex data to predict election outcomes as well as advise campaign teams. Moreover, Cloud-based service providers such as Amazon Web Services have deployed cloud-based technologies to help candidates in political campaigns. These technologies have been used by data scientists to optimize messaging systems, raise funds through collaboration with donor and supporter organizations (Patterson Dec 15, 2015).
D.CONCLUSION
Winning an election in the United States requires that candidates gather the appropriate tools and financial resources. Aspirants raise campaign money through various sources; donations from individual voters, corporations, unions, and public financing, among other sources. Although the mentioned sources are spelled out in law, candidates have always found various ways of circumventing the laws due to the complexity of the US constitution system .To apply the money raised for political campaigns, candidates use different platforms to articulate their policies to the electorate. They use mainstream media to share their policies, muddling opponents as well as advertise campaign activities. The mainstream media also plays a significant part in reporting election activities. However, the recent developments in technologies such as smartphones, Facebook, Twitter and cloud computing have given candidates a new edge to conduct campaigns at a much cheaper cost. From the literature review, it evident that US elections have challenges in regards to mobilization and expenditure of campaign finances. For this reason, relevant legislations need to be enacted to minimize the influence of money on election outcomes.
Works Cited
Cantor, Joseph E. Campaign Financing. Congressional Research Service, 2005. www.infousa.ru/government/.
The Economist. “The 2016 presidential money race.” The Economist, 7 Mar. 2016.
Federal Electoral Commission. “Presidential Election Campaign Fund.” 2016, www.fec.gov.
“Forgetting a key lesson from Watergate?” Produced by John Blake, CNN, 4 Feb. 2012.
Gibson, Ginger, and Grant Smith. “At under $5 each, Trump’s votes came cheap.” Reuters, [Washington], 9 Nov. 2016.
Hwang, Annie S. “Social Media and the Future of U.S. Presidential Campaigning.” Claremont McKenna College, 2016, pp. 1-65, scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2328&context=cmc_theses.
Lasson, Riley I. “A New Political Player:The Role of Super PACs in Congressional Elections.” University of Connecticut, 2016, pp. 1-27.
McCombs, Maxwell. “The Agenda-Setting Role of the Mass Media in the Shaping of Public Opinion.” University of Texas at Austin, 2000, pp. 1-21.
National Conference of State Legislatures. “State Campaign Finance Laws:An Overview.” 2016, www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/campaign-finance-an-overview.aspx.
Patterson, Dan. “Election Tech: The 4 technologies that will decide the next US president.” TechRepublic, 15 Dec. 2015.
Shoemaker, Pamela J, and Stephen D. Reese. Mediating the Message in the 21st Century: A Media Sociology Perspective. 3rd ed., Taylor and Francis, 2014.
Singer, Natasha, and Charles Duhigg. “Tracking Voters’ Clicks Online to Try to Sway Them.” The New York Times, [New york], 27 Oct. 2012.