Should Running for President be Reliant on Money?
Trinh Vo
With the recent Democratic debates and the election heating up, there are only 5 candidates left for the democrats. There are many reasons for dropping out of the running for president, but there have been many candidates who’ve dropped out of the race partially due to a lack of funding. Many of us are getting close to the age where we can vote. Thus, it’s important to delve deeper into what it takes to even consider running for president; more specifically, how much it takes to run, such as self-funding or depending on donors, to show how funding should not determine who wins or loses.

In the 2004 election, George W. Bush spent around $345 million to win the election. Within the 2016 campaign, Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump spent a combined $1.16 billion. This trend of setting records for most money spent on campaigns is a poor reflection of how winning the presidency works. This begs the question should campaigning be so reliant on the money? And is there a disadvantage to those who are more reliant on donations rather than self-funding? Or is funding a reflection of the candidate’s progress and popularity?
While the majority of candidates are very reliant on donors, some are more than others. Within the 2016 election, Donald Trump self-funded the majority of his campaign meaning he used personal funds like portions of his income, trusts, or investment in stocks and more. This allowed him the ability to last a lot longer in the running than anyone expected of him and eventually led to his win as president. Similarly, in the current 2020 election, Michael Bloomberg is known to completely self fund his campaign and not accept contributions from outside donors which has helped him remain in the running despite not winning in various polls. In contrast, many candidates are more reliant on donors to fund their campaigns. For example, Kamala Harris was very reliant on donors but also dropped out of the election race due to a lack of funding despite her qualifications for presidency. Thus showing how dependent on money the electoral race is currently and how the money doesn’t accurately represent the candidate.
There are many pros and cons of self-funding verses donors for a campaign. For example, self-funding makes it easier to advertise more and stay ahead of other candidates, in terms of resources available to them, and stay in the running longer. The production possibility curve is greater on the side of self-funding because it gives the candidate more freedom in advertising and where the funding is allocated instead of being more focused on abiding by the ideas of big donors. But the opportunity cost of self-funding a campaign is that if the candidate does not win, it is a bigger loss for them due to the amount of personal resources invested in their campaign. Similarly, self-funding doesn’t accurately reflect the current polls for each candidate. For example, Bloomberg has the most funding, but has not led in any polls. Whereas, Amy Klobuchar, a candidate who is more dependent on donors, after doing well in the Iowa caucus, rose in polls and gained more funding from donors that reflected her rise. Thus showing that while funding may be what staying in the race relies on, it doesn’t represent the candidates to the best extent.
Thus, as more candidates drop out of the running and as many of us get closer to voting age, think about how much goes into running for president. While it may seem like one candidate is significantly better because of how long they’ve stayed in the race and how much money they have, that may not be the case. So as we debate who we will get to vote for, maybe let’s look a little deeper into how they’ve got to where they are.
Works Cited
“The 2019 Presidential Campaign Dropouts, Ranked.” POLITICO, www.politico.com/news/magazine/2019/12/26/2020-presidential-campaign-dropouts-ranked-089675.
“2020 Presidential Race.” OpenSecrets, www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race.
“Democratic Drop-Outs Spent at Least $74M Pursuing Unsuccessful 2020 Bids.” OpenSecrets News, 20 Dec. 2019, www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/12/2020-democratic-drop-outs-spent-74m/.
Epstein, Reid J., and Trip Gabriel. “Pete Buttigieg to Quit Democratic Presidential Race.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 Mar. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/03/01/us/politics/pete-buttigieg-drops-out.html.
Graham, David A. “The 2020 U.S. Presidential Race: A Cheat Sheet.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 12 Feb. 2020, www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/02/2020-candidates-president-guide/582598/.
Investopedia. “How Much Does It Cost to Become President?” Investopedia, Investopedia, 10 Feb. 2020, www.investopedia.com/insights/cost-of-becoming-president/.
McMinn, Sean, and Alyson Hurt. “Tracking The Money Race Behind The Presidential Campaign.” NPR, NPR, 21 Feb. 2020, www.npr.org/2019/04/16/711812314/tracking-the-money-race-behind-the-presidential-campaign.
Overby, Peter. “Every Position Donald Trump Has Taken On How He Is Funding His Campaign.” NPR, NPR, 14 July 2016, www.npr.org/2016/07/14/485699964/every-position-donald-trump-has-taken-on-how-he-is-funding-his-campaign.
Panetta, Grace. “Here's Everything We Know about the Net Worth and Personal Finances of Each 2020 Democratic Presidential Candidate.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 29 Feb. 2020, www.businessinsider.com/estimated-net-worth-wealth-2020-democratic-presidential-candidates-2019-4.
Summers, Juana. “Bloomberg Has Already Spent $450 Million On Ads Since Launching His Campaign.” NPR, NPR, 21 Feb. 2020, www.npr.org/2020/02/21/808163144/bloomberg-has-already-spent-450-million-on-ads-since-launching-his-campaign.
“Using the Personal Funds of the Candidate.” FEC.gov, www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate-taking-receipts/using-personal-funds-candidate/.