When Did Politics Become Big Business?

 

Dr's Books, Blogs, and Podcasts

When Did Politics Become Big Business?

Somewhere along the line, politics stopped being about governing and started being about winning at any cost. Campaigns now rival Super Bowl ads in polish and price, elected officials sound more like influencers than public servants, and the rest of us are left picking teams in a game we did not sign up for. When did we let politics become big business, and why does it feel like society is paying the price? It is hard to pin down exactly when the shift happened. Some point to the 1950s when television transformed candidates into brands, like Eisenhower’s “I Like Ike” jingle. Others highlight Citizens United in 2010, the Supreme Court decision that unleashed a flood of corporate cash into campaigns, essentially letting deep pockets buy influence. The roots can be traced back to 19th-century political machines like Tammany Hall, where votes were exchanged like stocks. But wherever you mark the start, the trend is clear: power has shifted from citizens to donors, lobbyists, and media giants.

Today, politics isn’t just big business; it’s a thriving industry built on polarization. In 2020, U.S. election spending hit $14 billion, double 2016. That money does not unite us; it fuels attack ads and wedge issues like abortion, guns, and immigration that rally bases and alienate everyone else. Cable news and social media amplify the outrage because conflict keeps us watching and ad revenue flowing. An army of consultants, strategists, and think tanks now pack ideology as a product, not a principle. Based on information from various sources tracking campaign finance, the total spending for the 2024 U.S. presidential election ranged from $15.9 billion to $16 billion. This figure comes from analyses by organizations like OpenSecrets, which projected a cost of at least $15.9 billion, and other reports suggesting a figure close to $16 billion when including all campaign activities, including outside spending by super PACs and other groups. Breaking it down, the presidential race itself saw significant direct expenditure. Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign, including funds from when it was initially Joe Biden’s committee, spent over $800 million, while former President Donald Trump’s campaign expenditures totaled around $360 million to $425 million. Outside groups amplified this, with super PACs and other entities contributing upwards of $2 billion to $5 billion, depending on the source and time considered.

These numbers are staggering, but let’s pause and think critically. The wide range reflects different methodologies; some include only candidate committees, while others factor in outside money, which isn’t always fully transparent due to loopholes like “dark pool” funding. Inflation adjustments also muddy the waters; 2020’s $14 billion (adjusted to $18.2 billion in 2024 dollars) sets a high bar, yet 2024 still edges it out in raw terms. The concentration of spending in swing states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, where ad buys dominated, suggests a strategic focus that might inflate totals without necessarily swaying voters proportionally. Plus, the rise of digital ad spending, doubling to $1.35 billion online, hints at evolving tactics that might not all translate to effective outreach. So, the best estimate lands between $15.9 billion and $16 billion for the 2024 cycle. Division isn’t a bug in this system; it’s a feature.  The cost to society is steep. Trust in government has crumbled. Congress hasn’t cracked a 30% approval rating in over a decade. When politics feels like a mouthpiece for the highest bidder, people stop believing it can solve real problems. Instead of debating infrastructure or healthcare, we’re locked in culture wars and tribal shouting matches. Red vs. Blue isn’t just a policy disagreement anymore; it’s a lifestyle brand. The irony? The more polarized we get, the less governing happens, even as the stakes of climate change, inequality, and global instability keep rising. The government should assist society, not peddle biased spin. So why have we let potholes and public health lose out to soundbites? Blaming the system is tempting, but we must look in the mirror. Voters reward charisma and zingers over substance when watching a debate. Capitalism’s creep plays a role too: if everything’s for sale, why not democracy? And maybe it’s human nature, our love of teams and drama, that big business exploits. We’ve built a machine that thrives on our worst impulses, and now it’s running the show. What if this is permanent? The numbers suggest it might be: campaign spending keeps climbing, media empires are consolidating, and our attention spans are shrinking. But there’s hope. Campaign finance reform could curb the cash flow. A viable third party might shake up the binary tribalism. Media literacy that teaches people to spot the profit behind the propaganda could shift the conversation. It won’t be easy, though. The system’s too lucrative for the players at the top to let it go quietly.

Politics doesn’t have to be a business, but we must demand something better. Next time you see a slick campaign ad or a pundit screaming into the void, ask: Who’s profiting from this, and who’s losing? Spoiler: It’s probably you, me, and the society we’re trying to hold together. We deserve a government that serves, not one that sells. So, let’s become more common-sense thinkers and become well-versed in sifting through the facts.