CONNECT
Is Corporate Money in Politics Making Us Poorer Than Canada?
United Re:public / News Analysis
Published: Tuesday 31 July 2012
Does less money mean more equality?
Canadians are now officially earning more than Americans. Did this happen while we were too busy making fun of our neighbors to the north? Let’s take a closer look: the Canadian system of governance isn’t all that different from the American system:
These two former British colonies are both large nations that have federal systems in which national elections are regulated by the national government, but where state or provincial elections are regulated by those governments.
In both nations, political parties are not uniform across jurisdictions, and field candidates who compete in single member districts. Both have well-developed campaign finance regulations, and an independent agency to implement those regulations. Both have Courts that have sought to protect free expression by checking campaign finance regulations.
But where the Canadian and American governments differ is in the focus of their campaign finance regulations. The United States emphasizes the liberty of the individual in campaign contributions while Canada emphasizes equality in campaign finance. Take Canada’s campaign contribution limits:
There are contribution limits for individuals, corporations, and unions, and these are indexed to inflation. Spending limits are in effect for political parties, candidates, and “third parties” — non-party organizations that seek to influence election results.
According to the latest regulations, individual contributions in Canada are limited to $1,200 for a political party or candidate. The limit on election advertising by third parties is $188,250 compared to the unlimited amount of money that super PACs are allowed to raise and spend on American elections. Also different from the United States, corporations and trade unions are also banned from giving money to parties and candidates, and individual contributions exceeding $200 must be publically disclosed. Although corporations and trade unions can give money to third parties that run election advertisements, any contribution above $200 also has to be disclosed. Canadian law also states that political parties are entitled to free airtime on television and radio, which reduces pressure on these parties to scavenge for campaign contributions.
So how has Canada been doing with their campaign finance regulations that ensure equality? Clearly not too badly if their unemployment rate is lower than ours (at 7.2 percent) and the average Canadian is richer than the average American. But then again, I guess they are just losing slower than we are.
Get Email Alerts from NationofChange
ABOUT Mehrad Yazdi
Mehrad Yazdi is a summer intern at United Republic. He recently finished his sophomore year at George Washington University and plans to attend the London School of Economics during his junior year. Mehrad is originally from California and interned for his Senator before joining the United Republic team as a news curator and blogger
Top Stories
By Tara Culp- Ressler
13 comments on "Is Corporate Money in Politics Making Us Poorer Than Canada?"
March 09, 2013 12:02pm
Many men have a desire to increase their libido because they know that they don't have the same sex drive they once had in their youth. This has led them to search for procedures and remedies that may increase their sexual desire. Men undergo a decrease in their sexual desire for a variety of reasons that include: aging, being in poor health and suffering from erectile dysfunction. The most frequent problem attributed to libido problems is erectile dysfunction. This condition is the inability to make and/or keep a hard hard-on, which prohibits the male from engaging in sexual intercourse. When a man is faced with erectile dysfunction, they often feel depressed, aggravated and unsocial because they are unable to execute sexually. Men can take pleasure in knowing that erectile dysfunction and a reduced libido can be overturned. By taking the right steps, a man can get back their libido to a full-blooded level so that they can begin to have and enjoy intercourse. eressa
August 01, 2012 8:29am
What passes for "campaign donations" in the US are considered the bribery of public officials in Canada and are treated as a felony. As a result, the Canadian government functions in the best interest of entire nation, and not just those of the highest bidder.
July 31, 2012 6:29pm
@ Ron in NM
We shouldn't ban Fox news, but when they are found to be giving misleading information to the public, we should heavily fine them for each infraction--so heavy, in fact, that if they do it too often, the fines would outweigh their profits.
July 31, 2012 4:14pm
canada also has a leader who is not against canada becoming great and is willing to use its natural resources problem are coming for example its health care system is imploding [ per former head] USA ed system while #2 in $ spent it is all wasted on "esteem" and promoting failed cultures USA has high points such as freedom of speech
August 01, 2012 5:20pm
F for grammar
July 31, 2012 8:02pm
Having lived in Canada, my right to free speech is far greater in Canada than it is here. It is only under Mr Harper that rights have been cut back. See the student protests this year in Montreal.
I don't consider the promotion of 1st Nations culture as being a failure. It would be nice if the US could do more than pile dancing horse droppings on the US 1st Nations.
As for natural resources, yes Canada currently is using them; again, Harper is got his lips on Big Oil's rump and will keep the oil flowing regardless of environmental damage (see Enbridge's leaking pipelines). But then again, the per barrel price is favourable for extraction now.
The US health care system only works if you are rich.
July 31, 2012 6:26pm
@Oldhat
Canadian health care cost its taxpayers less than ours does in the US by far.
"Health care is one of the most expensive items of both nations’ budgets. In the United States, the various levels of government spend more per capita on health care than levels of government do in Canada. In 2004, Canada government-spending was $2,120 (in US dollars) per person on health care, while the United States government-spending $2,724.[18]
A 1999 report found that after exclusions, administration accounted for 31.0% of health care expenditures in the United States, as compared with 16.7% of health care expenditures in Canada. In looking at the insurance element, in Canada, the provincial single-payer insurance system operated with overheads of 1.3%, comparing favourably with private insurance overheads (13.2%), U.S. private insurance overheads (11.7%) and U.S. Medicare and Medicaid program overheads (3.6% and 6.8% respectively). The report concluded by observing that gap between U.S. and Canadian spending on health care administration had grown to $752 per capita and that a large sum might be saved in the United States if the U.S. implemented a Canadian-style health care system.[83]
However, U.S. government spending covers less than half of all health care costs. Private spending for health care is also far greater in the U.S. than in Canada. In Canada, an average of $917 was spent annually by individuals or private insurance companies for health care, including dental, eye care, and drugs. In the U.S., this sum is $3,372."
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_health_care_systems_in_Ca...)
All statistics are cited in the article.
I simple search would dispel the Limbaugh and Beck myths you are referring to.
July 31, 2012 10:20am
We seem to loose sight of the reality that in the US, the GOP runs the show whether they are in power or not. We have seen this in action since the start of the Obama administration. The use of the filibuster in the Senate coupled with the constant media disinformation of FOX News and mainstream outlets complicancy with the distortions of facts. Lies become the truth only when they are not exposed. The "Citizens United " case is only the latest example of the power of the GOP to rule over our country. As long as we put up with it, it will grow in strength and power.
July 31, 2012 11:29am
As long as you continue to believe the myth that there's any substantial difference between the two-right-wings of the Corporate War Party, you're doing your job as a good consuming unit for the USAmerican Empire.
July 31, 2012 12:19pm
Chetdude:
I'm not seeking an argument, but what is your solution? It's easy enough, don't you think, to sit on the sidelines and shout, "a plague on both your houses."
Admittedly, there was once a greater difference between the parties. The Good Old Plutocrats moved the political center to the right, over the years, to the detriment of all of us.
But there are still some progressives in the Democratic Party, and there are none in the Republican Party, which seems to have one controlling message: "Don't tax the Super-Rich too heavily, so you can be trickled on." All this trickling on began under Ronnie Raygun, but at least the conservative Democrat Clinton brought a little more equality to the playing field, and reduced the deficit as well.
And while Obamacare is not what I wished for it, it does make health care more accessible to millions of Americans, and prevents the insurers from denying health care to those who are sick. I consider those as plus factors, and while it doesn't seem like much to some, I think they're mistaken. Maybe someday we'll have universal health care in this country, but not if the Republicans take over every branch of government. If you don't see some difference between the consequences of having one or the other party in control of government, perhaps you're too wrapped up in your negativism, while offering no solutions at all. I get irked at the party and individual Democrats all the time, but I could have no dialogue at all with the "Tea Party" screamers and yahoos.
It's easy to throw rocks and call names, but what do you offer instead?
July 31, 2012 10:13am
Amerika is now # 17 in science and # 25 in math when it once was # 1 in both.
The country engaged in a dumbing down of the populce, and it is working.
Canada also has national health insurance (socialism).
July 31, 2012 9:32am
Canada determined some time ago Fox news was not news and banned it. So they simply haven't the level of corruption we've got.
Meanwhile, the american public's brainwashing continues.
July 31, 2012 12:44pm
SKINGK:
Did Canada really ban the Fox News Channel? I hadn't heard of that. I wish we could do likewise in this country. I believe that political polarization got a swift boost in America when that rich Australian, Rupert Murdoch, came to the U.S. and started Fox News Channel and later bought the Wall Street Journal.
Yeah, I know he became a naturalized citizen, but why shouldn't he? We have the lowest taxes on the super-rich of any advanced nation. And he'd like to keep it that way. Indeed, if Willard Mitt Romney gets elected, their rates will go even lower.
What's so bad about the Fox News Channel propaganda machine is that you can't seem to acquire cable TV without FNC included, whether you want it or not.
The de-regulation of the media worked out fine for the GOP and its agenda. I remember when TV stations had to have their broadcast license renewed at regular intervals, and they had to show that they were doing things that benefited the community, and equal air time had to be given to both parties.
Yes, the brainwashing continues, so much so that large segments of the electorate vote AGAINST their own economic interests, which really seems stupid to me.