Alexandria, VA – The Center for Competitive Politics (CCP), America’s largest nonprofit working to promote and defend First Amendment rights to free political speech, assembly, and petition, today released an issue brief showing that money spent by candidates and super PACs was negatively correlated with the votes they received in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Jeb Bush’s campaign provides the clearest example to date that money alone cannot persuade voters to support a candidate. Despite leading his opponents in combined spending (the total amount spent by his campaign and the super PAC supporting his candidacy), Bush finished 6th in Iowa and 4th in New Hampshire. The Bush campaign and pro-Bush super PAC ultimately spent $2,592 per vote received, more than any other candidate in the Republican race. But CCP finds that, even beyond Bush, candidate spending and independent spending still were not a determinant of electoral success.
“The hysteria over ‘Big Money’ is not just exaggerated, it’s wrong. Voters in New Hampshire and Iowa showed yet again that money can’t buy love, or votes,” said CCP President David Keating. “Voters benefit from the money spent by campaigns and super PACs because it provides more information about the candidates and their policy positions. Thanks in part to this spending, a large field of candidates were able to have their messages heard, and voters were able to make a decision about who to support. Money facilitated speech about candidates, and that is essential to a healthy democracy.”
To view CCP’s latest issue brief, co-authored by McWethy Fellow and Policy Analyst Luke Wachob and Research Fellow Scott Blackburn, click here or go to https://www.ifs.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/2016-02-10_Issue-Brief_Iowa-and-New-Hampshire-Results-Indicate-Moneys-Failure-to-Buy-the-2016-Election.pdf.
