Big money keeping minority politicians out of office, report says

Big money and politics go hand in hand, and even in a country with its first black president, the widening wealth gap continues to muffle the voices of minorities by locking them out of political office.

Campaign funds come overwhelmingly from white contributors, shows a new report released Thursday by Demos, a national public policy organization based in New York.

“Economic bias means racial bias,” said Adam Lioz, the report’s author and a counsel and senior adviser for policy and outreach at Demos. “The underrepresentation of blacks is driven by constraints on their entry on the ballot.”

In a typical election cycle, 90 percent or more of the candidates who raise the most money win their races, and 90 percent of elected leaders are white. Combined, Latinos and Asians account for more than 22 percent of the population but hold fewer than 2 percent of elected positions nationwide. In 2009 just 9 percent of state legislators were African-American, and 3 percent were Latino, compared with 13.5 percent and 15.4 percent of the total population, respectively.

Candidates who are minorities raised 47 percent less money than white candidates in 2006 state races — and 64 percent less in the South. Latino candidates for state office raised less money than non-Latinos in 67 percent of state races.

“We believe that the size of your wallet should not determine the size of your voice in a democracy,” Lioz said, especially as the nation is only 30 years away from becoming a minority-majority nation. “Our government is much more responsive to wealthy white donors.”

And the policy priorities of these donors don’t always match the concerns of communities of color.

“Our skewed priorities that serve the donors fall disproportionately on the backs of people of color,” Lioz said. He cited a 2011 study that showed that white state legislators of both major political parties were less likely to reply to letter from constituents with names that appear to be African-American.

The disproportionate number of minorities who are incarcerated and the disproportionate number of homeowners of color who suffered from the subprime-lending crisis are examples of how big money thwarts racial equity, Lioz said.

“The power of big money, combined with systemic racism, has fueled two of the most destructive policies targeted toward people of color: the prison industrial complex and predatory mortgage lending,” the report said.

“Much of the report made sense by intuition,” said Cornell William Brooks, president of the NAACP. “What’s great about the report is that it documents the injustice perpetuated and … makes clear the connection between campaign contributions and injustices on the working class and poor people.”

A series of Supreme Court decisions have opened the door for unlimited contributions and spending in politics, and the report recommends amending the Constitution to clarify that the people have the power to rein in the influence of big money. Two recent rulings, Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC, have shifted the balance of power in candidate fundraising even more sharply toward the elite donor class and away from ordinary citizens, the report said.

But it also points to programs that have successfully overcome the money barrier.

In New York City, a matching system allows small contributions to carry more weight. The city matches 6 to 1 the first $175 of a local resident’s contribution to qualifying City Council and mayoral candidates. At least one small donation came from nearly 90 percent of the city’s neighborhoods in recent elections.

Similar grant-based systems in Arizona and Connecticut are significantly increasing the diversity of donors and help more candidates of color run for office and win, Lioz said.

Young people are becoming more politically active and are demanding government accountability, Brooks said. “We are in the midst of, potentially, a new civil rights movement,” he said. “If you believe your home is an asset and a treasure, if you believe that your children are a treasure, the way we finance elections should allow you to protect your children.”