Skip to main content

Originally published June 24, 2014 at 8:13 PM | Page modified June 24, 2014 at 10:48 PM

  • Share:
  • Comments (0)
  • Print

It takes money to get money out of politics

The measure to get big money out of politics failed to make the ballot because it lacked one thing: big money.

Seattle Times staff columnist

Reader Comments
Hide / Show comments
A journalist once asked Ralph Nader how a person (or people) could stop corporate influence on his or her (or their)... MORE
Yeah, big money is really skewing elections around these parts, I tell ya. There reportedly was a republican in city... MORE
So union $$ is different...right Danny? MORE


Earlier this year, a group of a thousand well-meaning folks set out to tackle arguably the biggest problem in politics: how big money from the superrich and special-interest groups is tilting democracy.

They failed. One of the main reasons sums up why politics feels stuck in such a rut: They didn’t have enough money to buy their anti-big-money measure onto the ballot.

“Ironic, isn’t it?” says Jim Street, the former Seattle City Council member who was helping the campaign for Initiative 1329. It sought to limit the blitz of spending by wealthy mega-donors and others unleashed by the Citizens United ruling and other cases.

“It’s true that if we had gotten a big donor, we would have made it,” Street said. “There’s a contradiction there that is maddening.”

Instead, the all-volunteer signature-gathering effort fell short, collecting about 150,000 signatures (247,000 are needed).

You know that Margaret Mead quote that’s in almost every political-campaign headquarters, the one that goes “never doubt a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world?” If Mead were around today she might add: “Plus you need a half-million bucks. Minimum.”

As usual this year, the initiative measures that have raised $500,000 or more, from a few wealthy donors or special-interest groups, are on track to qualify for voters’ ballots in November. The ones that didn’t, won’t. The money typically is used to pay signature-gatherers $1 to $3 per signature.

Initiative 1329 sought to put Washington on the record as favoring a constitutional amendment saying that “money is not speech.” The idea was that eventually Congress might be allowed to reinstate campaign-contribution limits and disclosure rules, if it wanted. Previous laws limiting political spending were struck down by the Supreme Court, causing unreported “dark” money flowing though so-called super PACs to soar.

“The point we were making is that big money can be critically damaging to democracy, especially in the way it creates an uneven playing field,” Street said. “So to fall short in part due to the money issue ... it’s the kind of thing that makes citizens disillusioned about their politics.”

The disillusionment is reaching unprecedented levels. Did you see the recent headlines that only 7 percent of Americans now have confidence in Congress? That’s the lowest figure ever recorded, not only for Congress but for any institution in American society. Seven percent is less than the number that want America to be a Communist country (11 percent).

(Aside: Who are these 7 percent saying “heckuva job you’ve done lately, Congress?” The 1 percent plus their relatives?)

The wash of money through politics is hardly the only reason for Congress’ poor image (the constant management-by-crisis hasn’t helped.) Nor does money always trump — earlier this month the House majority leader, Eric Cantor, lost his seat despite spending more at steakhouses than his opponent did on his entire campaign. But as the big money gets bigger, it can feed a sense there’s nothing you can do to change anything, Street said.

“It’s corrosive,” Street said. “That’s why you see those dismal poll numbers at the national level. People feel that system is fundamentally rigged.”

It’s true that all the action lately in politics seems to be bubbling at the bottom, often all the way down at the city level. It’s as if people have given up on the national government to do anything.

Street said his group may try an initiative to the Legislature next year. Those get months longer to collect signatures, making an all-volunteer, low-money approach theoretically possible.

“I’m 72 years old, and I don’t know if anything’s going to change while I’m around,” he said. “But we have to keep working at it. Cheer up, man!”

Or just bring your checkbook. Because it looks like it’s going to take some serious money to get the serious money out of politics.

Danny Westneat’s column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or

Four weeks for 99 cents of unlimited digital access to The Seattle Times. Try it now!

Also in Local News

News where, when and how you want it

Email Icon

 Subscribe today!

Subscribe today!

99¢ for four weeks of unlimited digital access.


About Danny Westneat

Danny Westneat takes an opinionated look at the Puget Sound region's news, people and politics. Send tips or comments to His column runs Wednesday and Sunday. | 206-464-2086

Partner Video


The Seattle Times

The door is closed, but it's not locked.

Take a minute to subscribe and continue to enjoy The Seattle Times for as little as 99 cents a week.

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited content access is included with most subscriptions.

Subscriber login ►
The Seattle Times

To keep reading, you need a subscription upgrade.

We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access. For unlimited access, please upgrade your digital subscription.

Call customer service at 1.800.542.0820 for assistance with your upgrade or questions about your subscriber status.

The Seattle Times

To keep reading, you need a subscription.

We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access. Subscribe now for unlimited access!

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited content access is included with most subscriptions.

Activate Subscriber Account ►