By
Sankar Ray
The
price of a vote is estimated at € 6 for the legislative elections, and € 32 for
the municipal polls in France, according to a working paper ‘The Price of a
Vote: Evidence from France 1993-2014’, scheduled to be published in February
2019 and, authored by Julia Cagé, associate professor of economics, Sciences Po
Paris, and Yasmine Bekkoiche Ph.D. student at the Paris School of Economics.
“Simulations show that small changes in spending patterns and caps can have a
large impact on electoral outcomes and seats. Our results suggest that
political finance needs to be tightly regulated”, they cautioned. Indeed, money
in politics is no more ‘a strictly American phenomenon. In France, despite
strong campaign finance laws, campaign donations have a direct influence on
legislative and municipal election results”, the authors state.
Cagé
(34-plus), the better-half of Thomas Piketty, author of best-seller ‘Capital in
the Twenty-first Century’ and a severe critique of growing inequality in global
system of capitalism, subtly questioned the integrity of President Emmanuel
Macron in a year-end interview to the morninger of Communist Party of France.
Terming Macron’s economic policy as one that ‘corresponds to the preferences
expressed by these rich people and not at all to the interests of the
majority’, she expressed concern over the very system which is flawed and gave
a call for ‘cleaning up the financial system of democracy’. This is elaborated
in her paper ‘Le Prix de la démocratie de’ (Price of Democracy).
In
a frontal attack on the shah-en-shah of Élysée Palace, Cagé cited, “In the City
of London alone, he raised €800,000 (compared to € 30,000 raised in the city of
Lille). The consequences were rapid: abolition of the ISF, flat tax on capital
and abolition of the exit tax”, She called it a kickback, “except that it’s not
corruption, since there’s nothing illegal. It is the system that is ‘flawed’.
Elaborating the point, she said, “Although Emmanuel Macron did not receive
direct funding, he did receive public money. Those who gave €7,500 actually
spent only €2,500. The remaining €5,000 is refunded in the form of a tax
reduction. Of the 13 million donations that financed the social-liberal LaREM
campaign (La République En Marche), €8 million were paid by the French. This is
one of the other injustices in the system, because only the wealthiest benefit
from this tax reduction. When the most modest, who are not subject to income
tax, want to give, for example, € 300, they pay € 300.”
The
happenings in the financial architecture of West European political economy lead
several current affair analysts to be on guard against ‘Americanisation’ of
European politics, although it’s not new. It was precipitate from the mid-20th
century. But there is a perceptible monetary infection across the Atlantic. It
penetrates Europe but in a skewed and uneven way, especially in the so-called
former ‘socialist’ economies. Ten years ago, in an M.Sc. dissertation on
Americanisation of electoral campaign in Croatia in 2003 and 2007, submitted to
the London School of Economics, Milly A Doolan inquired into the impress of
‘Americanisation’ as an indicator of change and its bearing on not only the
‘political campaigning trends but also to a society in general’. Croatia,
formally a part of a ‘socialist state a quarter century ago, became ‘a democracy
in which catch-all messages have replaced those framed by ideologies. Doolan
expands the hypothesis further: “catch-all parties allow the assimilation and
representation of diverse interests and demands of different groups, and may
even embrace ideologically contradictory policy alternatives.”
The
two Paris-based economists are precisely worried over the American shadow over
European democracy. “Money in politics is not a strictly American phenomenon.
In France, despite strong campaign finance laws, campaign donations have a
direct influence on legislative and municipal election results”, they candidly
put. Things turned shady with Macron’s electioneering. The republican tradition
of “One person, one vote” was replaced. Cagé stated plainly: “one euro, one
vote in reality as Macron’s election was largely funded by private donations,
unlike those of other candidates. This case begs the larger question: can
campaign spending influence elections, even in countries that have limited
campaign spending by law?” On the rising inequality, she cautioned, “money may
increasingly corrupt politics. Such a risk explains why, in the majority of the
developed countries, there is legislation to control and limit the amount both
firms and individuals can give to politicians, political parties and electoral
campaigns. In the United States, where most of these regulations have been
removed during the last decades, mega donors fuel the rising costs of
elections”
The
forthcoming paper warns of ill-effects of private donations that “represent a
much higher share of funding for right-wing than for left-wing candidates in
both municipal and legislative elections. On average, right-wing candidates
receive an extra €3,400 in private donations for their campaign in municipal elections
compared to left-wing candidates, while candidates from the extreme left and
the extreme right receive nearly no donations. This extra €3,400 translates
directly into right-wing candidates getting €4,200 more in total revenues, and
spending €3,000 more for their campaigns. While these numbers sound small
compared to donations and spending in American elections, they are quite
significant in France, where average campaign spending per candidate on
municipal elections is only €22,000 per election”. The authors found how money
in campaign cast a “significant impact on votes, both for municipal and
legislative elections” and impact of this is “robust in controlling for the
endogeneity of spending.” (IPA Service)
The post ‘Political Finance’ Threatens European Polity appeared first on Newspack by India Press Agency.
