The Center for Competitive Politics (CCP) released an Issue Analysis today showing that campaign contribution limits do not produce less corruption by public officials. CCP Research Director Laura Renz compared Department of Justice data on public corruption convictions to information on contribution limits in all 50 states.
The analysis found no correlation at all between contribution limits and the corruption of public officials, undermining a frequent claim by supporters of campaign finance restrictions that lower contribution limits will somehow inhibit corruption and create good government. States with low limits are found in both the “high corruption” and “low corruption” categories, and states with no or very high limits are also found in both the “high corruption” and “low corruption” categories. The three states with the lowest rates of corruption, Oregon, Nebraska, and Iowa, all have no or very high limits.
“This research refutes a key plank of the fable told by supporters of low contribution limits: that by sacrificing the First Amendment rights of citizens by imposing strict contribution limits, you can reduce corruption in politics,” Renz said. “The evidence does not support the claim that large donations lead to corrupt government and contribution limits are needed to keep elected officials honest.”
The analysis also found that the seven states with the lowest rates of corruption included five with no or very high limits, while the seven states with the highest rates of corruption include four with very low limits.
The Center for Competitive Politics is a non-profit organization which seeks to protect the First Amendment’s political rights of speech, assembly, and petition.
