Presidential Campaign Financing
 |
Cara Fisher is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center. She is a graduate of University of Texas-Austin. |
Senator Hilary Clinton recently announced the creation of her presidential exploratory committee, the first official indication that she is a likely presidential candidate. Her website makes clear from the maximum donations it accepts that if she runs, she will become the first potential presidential candidate in over 30 years to reject public financing for both the primary and general elections.
While many candidates have relied on private donations to fund their campaigns during the primary season, after receiving their party’s nomination at their respective national conventions, candidates have consistently utilized public financing throughout the duration of their campaigns. This system was instituted in the mid-1970s as part of an attempt to “clean up” Washington in response to the Watergate scandal and to limit financial influence and corruption in politics. Recent articles in both the Washington Post and New York Times discuss the effect of Clinton’s decision on the future of the presidential public financing system.
Presidential campaigns have become increasingly expensive, and many front runner candidates are now able to raise more money through private donations and from special interest groups. If candidates feel that the public financing system does not provide them with sufficient funds to run their campaign, it is logical that some would opt out if they believe they can sustain their campaign through fundraising efforts. Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization, issued this statement in response to these recent events, highlighting the need to reform the public financing system.