undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbmelton11y ago0 comments

That people think it works enough to pay money for it isn't proof that it does. I dub this the 'Ion Bracelet Effect' (though there's probably a better name for it already).

"'American Crossroads, the super PAC founded by Karl Rove, spent $104 million in the general election, but none of its candidates won. The United States Chamber of Commerce spent $24 million backing Republicans in 15 Senate races; only two of them won. Sheldon Adelson, the casino mogul, spent $53 million on nine Republican candidates, eight of whom lost.' It was, as the paper noted, 'A Landslide Loss for Big Money.'"[1]

"When a candidate doubled their spending, holding everything else constant, they only got an extra one percent of the popular vote. It’s the same if you cut your spending in half, you only lose one percent of the popular vote. So we’re talking about really large swings in campaign spending with almost trivial changes in the vote."[2]

[1] - http://reason.com/archives/2014/07/14/dear-liberals-stop-fre...

[2] - http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/12/does-money-really-buy-ele...

0 comments

knowtheory11y ago

No, but it's not hard to provide actual mechanisms to explain how money influences politics.

That's not saying every dollar is the same, and the money -> influence function is a straight line. But money buys reach and coverage at the very least.

alexqgb11y ago

OpenSecrets.org hosts a long-running effort to correlate the rate at which legislators favor or oppose particular industries with the size of the contributions they receive. Turns out, they track very closely. Like, to the point where reasonable people stop thinking "correlation" and start thinking "causation."

That's a very important point in public corruption debates, since there mere perception of corruption can diminish trust in public institutions. And trust, as it turns out, is their greatest asset. That's why effective anti-corruption laws are written to prohibit actions that simply appear corrupt, along with those that can be proven corrupt beyond all reasonable doubt.

When it comes to public trust, appearance really does matter.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse