Like Christmas, election season begins earlier every year. Once, it began with the party primaries, then the pre-primary debates, then the pre-debate speculation. Potential presidential candidates now announce that they’re running a year and a half before the election. Some announce even earlier that they will potentially make some future announcements. The media covers it all in advance, discussing possible announcements and announcement-announcements months before they happen. We may laugh, but the perpetual campaign season is hurting our election system.
Many politicians never leave the campaign trail. Even in Congress, while voting on bills or working in committee, they’re thinking about how their actions will affect the next election. Will their base support them? Will they keep their campaign contributors? Much of the congressional gridlock we’ve seen during the past few years can be blamed on the endless election season. Politicians who depend on a politically extreme voting base tend to be hard-liners, unwilling to compromise or work with the other side to get anything done. The Tea Party block of the Republican House is a perfect example. They rely on far-right supporters to remain in office — any compromise could cost them their jobs.
But politicians have little choice other than to appeal to radical constituents. They are the ones active in raising money and support for candidates. More importantly, they are the ones who vote. Endless campaigns may be responsible for low voter turnout.
Presidential elections in 2008 and 2004 saw a voter turnout of around 55 percent. Midterm elections are generally even lower: Around 37 percent in 2010, 2006, and 2002. Voters faced with perpetual election coverage become fatigued, tired of the candidates and uninterested in the outcome of the election.
The consequences of constant election cycles reach beyond political gridlock and poor voter turnout. Longer campaigns take more money, and that means candidates need to accept more campaign contributions. The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision allows unlimited corporate donations to politicians, in the name of free speech. These donations may not have to be disclosed, and with political action committees and “super PACs” the question of campaign money becomes even more complicated.
It all adds up to this: The endless campaign season means politicians are appealing more to a hard-line base and corporate donors than their actual constituents. Many voters feel disenfranchised, and voter turnout rates have steadily declined for decades. The perpetual election season is hurting our democracy.
Limiting the length of the campaign season is up to us. We must make it clear to the media that we are not interested in years of campaign coverage that will continue to run as long as ratings are high. And we must hold our politicians accountable for how they do their jobs, not how they run their campaigns.
Finding a solution will be difficult. The problems have emerged slowly, the election season gradually getting longer year after year, especially as 24-hour news channels have expanded their coverage.
But the government can do something as well. Congress needs to pass laws limiting campaign contributions and ensure that we know who is donating to our politicians. Unlimited and untraceable corporate campaign contributions mean the system is not working.
And it’s time to fix it.