A sneak peek at my paper…
Nidhi a -
Week of April 21
As we approach our final presentations, my Literature Review reminds me of the work I’ve been modeling my research on. As pasted below, I hope to provide even half of the commentary any of these keystone pieces have provided to help guide me in my research!
Campaign finance has stood often at the epicenter of scholarly and legal debates surrounding equity in politics and democratic integrity. The 2010 case Citizens United v. FEC allowed unlimited independent expenditures from corporations and unions and fundamentally altered the landscape of campaign financing in the United States. Scholars such as Hasen (2015) and Levitt (2010) argue that the ruling not only will flood elections with corporate money but will also severely degrade transparency and accountability as it allows money to shape political outcomes from the public’s perception.
Patrick Flavin’s 2015 work offers empirical backing for these assertions made by Hasen and Levitt. He articulates that in states with stricter campaign finance laws, policy outcomes tend to more closely align with public preferences. Additionally, even pre- Citizens United we see scholars like Lynda Powell (2002) further explore how campaign contributions influence policy agendas, committee assignments, and political priorities. Her results claim that financial support often translates towards tangible access and influence.
As Super PACs and soft money emerge, wealthy donors’ and industry groups can now also indirectly fund candidates and issue-based campaigns with next to no regulatory oversight (Gerken 2015). Thomsen (2020) and La Raja (2014) note how these mechanisms benefit ideologically extreme candidates, and they will in turn receive support from like-minded donor networks and potentially spread such messages through fundraising and campaign strategies catered towards divisive messaging.
But the specific impact on Latino communities remains underexplored and these are populations that are uniquely vulnerable to restrictive immigration laws and labor exploitation. As studies by Collingwood et. al (2014) and Terriquez (2015) state, industries such as private prisons and agriculture will likely profit from policies that increase immigrant detention or maintain a cheap labor force. These industries are highly active in campaign finance yet the relationship between these industries’ political spending and votes have been largely unquantified at a state level.
By expanding on the foundation of deeply thoughtful literature, this study incorporates a state-specific, community-centered focus. While the broader influence of campaign finance has been studied, Latino constituents often get grouped in a larger body of marginalized folks when there are concrete ties to specific factors harming their political status in the United States. By analyzing this more nuanced understanding of political inequality and the role campaign finance plays in perpetuating systemic harm, this study hopes to lean upon cornerstone work by Collingwood et. al in the research ahead.