|
Disparity
in
donations study raises other issues
|
A pioneering
study released recently highlights much of what is wrong with politics. The results, that
show that the money for political campaigns in Texas is coming from a small number of
wealthy White interests, is neither shocking nor surprising.
The report concludes that “people of color in Texas contribute far less money to
political campaigns than do wealthy Anglos and, as a result, are often excluded from
effective political representation.”
The NAACP, the Center for Voting and Democracy, the Southwest Voter Registration
Education Project, and Campaigns for People presented the report “The Color of Money:
Race, Class, and Campaign Contributions in Texas” at a press conference held in
Austin.
The report documents the extreme concentration of political contributions and influence in
the hands of a few, very wealthy White donors. Claude Foster, regional coordinator of the
NAACP’s Voter Empowerment Program, stated that “since African-Americans have
less income and less disposable money than other individuals in the country, we’re at
a disadvantage where money is a major factor in whether or not you can participate in the
political process.”
Black Texans, explained Foster, earn about half of what their White counterparts earn per
year ($14,213 and $26,706,respectively) and thus have less money to give to campaigns. The
average Latino income is even less at $10,534 per year.
These points are well-taken and this coalition is to be applauded for doing this
study. Although the results are not surprising, this is the first time a group has laid it
out this way, in plain view. So where do we go from here? This groundbreaking report could
be put to good use in two ways.
First, it could be a way to revive discussions of campaign finance reform. With the
exception of “soft” money, African-American candidates and interests have little
access to political capital. In Texas, for example, there are few (if any) James
Leiningers who can pour millions of dollars into a candidate (Rick Perry, for example) or
a cause (vouchers, for example). I wouldn’t begrudge him the right to donate his
money as he sees fit, but there needs to be a discussion about what he gets for that money
and the little people who are kicked to the political curb when he is allowed to paper a
candidate or a campaign with money.
Another discussion that this report could generate is to raise the question of how
to get Black people to donate more to support their candidates and issues. Granted, we
don’t have the same degree of disposable income that allows us to be political
philanthropists but that doesn’t mean we don’t have any money to contribute to
candidates of, say, the caliber of a Ron Kirk.
I see too many Dooney Bourke bags and other designer clothing in my community to believe
we are all poor. It’s a matter of values and priorities. Campaigns for
People, a non-profit organization that promotes state campaign finance reform, produced
the report to highlight racial and class disparities in political contributions.
Now, a logical next step would be to discuss the disparity between those who talk about
wanting political representation and those who are willing to donate to the campaigns of
people who they think can provide it.
I have put my money where my mouth is, politically, in a number of ways this election
season. I would encourage others to do so, too. |
