Follow the Money

There is a constant debate surrounding the freedom to support political campaigns. Some wealthy contributors might argue that their right to free speech should allow them to support their candidate of choice with however much money they would like give. They feel their contribution is a way of letting their money speak for them.

As a predominantly libertarian thinker, I would normally say that the government should not control the way anyone wants to spend their money. But in this case, I think these wealthy contributors are wrong.

The way to support a candidate is with your vote. Everyone gets one vote. Everyone already has a voice. So why should someone who makes more money have more of a voice than the next guy? Allowing these powerful people to control elections by pumping their candidate of choice with the cash needed for an expensive campaign is unethical.

I don’t mean to say you shouldn’t support a candidate financially, but if everyone gives the designated amount, this will only force candidates to do what they should be doing: using their platform and their personality to gather more people behind their cause instead of schmoozing a select few rich guys for their hefty contributions.

Because of my take on this debate, the information that William “Windy” March gave us about following the money was exciting. If my fellow journalists and I could follow the money trail to expose the rampant existence of money laundering, more of these shady deals could be stopped.

I didn’t realize the number of sites available to help you find the connections between politicians and their contributors. March has 200 sites bookmarked of this nature on his computer and he said he has to find at least two more each week. Sites like opensecrets.org, show who gives where and who they are. March used the site to find out how many of Jiminez’s employees supported Clinton’s campaign in 1996. Later, he researched some of the names at the Supervisor of Elections Office to find out if and with which party each employee was registered to vote.

The petty rules at the Supervisor of Elections office about where you have to stand to take notes on voter registration records only strengthened my observation that government organizations are reluctantly “in the sunshine”. However, March’s determination to find this story and prove his point to his readers kept him from being put off by a little white line in his way.
The Mark Jiminez case was inspiring. Even though March did not come out and say that Jiminez laundered money given to the Clinton campaign he gave his readers all the facts they needed to draw this conclusion. Ultimately, his story had enough power to effect change and led to an indictment of Jiminez.

This session with March gave me some of the most practical tools we’ve learned about so far. About the Jiminez story, March said, "I didn't interview anybody until this story was essentially already written." This quote drove the point home that records-based reporting can help you dig to find the real answers about a story. With the know how to find these sites and follow the money I feel as if I could really keep my representatives and their supporters accountable to the current campaign contribution laws. March warned us that you won’t always find what you’re looking for, but I think the lesson here was to take the time to look.