In an era when millions struggle to make ends meet, the staggering sums raised for political campaigns stand as a stark reminder of our misaligned priorities. Recent election cycles have seen billions of dollars poured into candidate coffers, while poverty continues to grip communities across the nation.
Consider the numbers: In this year’s election, candidates will spend a projected $10 billion for ads alone. Meanwhile, more than 37 million Americans live below the poverty line, facing daily challenges to secure food, housing and health care.
This disparity raises a crucial question: What if even a fraction of these campaign funds were redirected to addressing pressing social needs?
The potential impact is profound:
First, in housing: No family should be sleeping on the streets — but they are. More than a million Americans experience homelessness on any given night. Campaign billions could put roofs over their heads. And there are other areas.
Education: No child should be denied a quality education because of their ZIP code — but they are. Millions of students attend underfunded schools. Political war chests could form thousands of minds.
Health care: No one should die from treatable illnesses — but they do. Tens of thousands of Americans perish yearly because of a lack of health coverage. Campaign fortunes could save countless lives.
Jobs: No hardworking individual should live in poverty — but they do. More than 37 million Americans live below the poverty line. Election funds could create pathways to dignified, living-wage employment.
Infrastructure: No community should lack basic services in 21st century America — but they do. Millions live without reliable internet, safe roads or clean water. Political millions could rebuild forgotten towns and neighborhoods.
Food Security: No child should go to bed hungry — but they do. More than 9 million children in the United States face food insecurity. The price of a few campaign ads could fill their plates for months.
These facts highlight the stark contrast between campaign spending and pressing social needs, emphasizing the human cost of our current priorities.
The absence of widespread outrage over this misallocation of resources is puzzling. Perhaps it’s due to the normalization of exorbitant campaign spending, or a sense of powerlessness in the face of entrenched political systems.
However, there are signs of growing discontent. Grassroots movements advocating for campaign finance reform and increased focus on social issues are gaining traction. Some politicians have made a point of rejecting large donations from political action committees and running on smaller-dollar contributions.
As citizens, we must demand better. We should challenge candidates to justify their fundraising in light of pressing social needs. We should support reforms that limit campaign spending and amplify the voice of ordinary voters over wealthy donors.
Ultimately, a republic that allows vast sums to be spent on political theater while neglecting the basic needs of its citizens is a republic in crisis. It’s time to realign our priorities and invest in the wellbeing of all members of society, not just attempt to influence those seeking office. If you believe in policy for fighting poverty, give some money to candidates who support that, but also give directly to organizations that do the work.
The funds spent on campaigns could transform lives and communities. The real question is: Do we have the collective will to make it happen?
Natalie Wood of Lake Oswego is executive director of Catholic Charities of Oregon.
