How did we get so many uncontested Congressional races?

Campaign finance reform.

Even this account understates the complexity of the law. In an amicus brief filed in the Citizens United case, eight former FEC commissioners note that the FEC has now promulgated regulations for 33 specific types of political speech, and for 71 different types of “speakers.” The statute and accompanying FEC regulations total more than 800 pages; the FEC has published more than 1,200 pages in the Federal Register explaining its decisions; and it has issued more than 1,700 advisory opinions since its creation in 1976.

In other words, if you try to run a credible campaign, you and your contributors run a good chance of ignorantly breaking the law.

Samples makes the Madisonian observation that “politicians use political power to further their own goals rather than the public ­interest….Campaign finance laws might be, in other words, a form of ­corruption.” Noting that “scholars date the largest decline in congressional electoral competition from 1970″ and that the Federal Election ­Campaign Act — the foundation of modern campaign-finance law — was passed in 1972, Samples points out that “the decline in ­electoral competition and the new era of campaign finance regulation are virtually conterminous.”

This is no accident. Since the passage of the FECA, the average incumbent spending advantage over challengers in U.S. House races has soared from approximately 1.5-to-1 to nearly 4-to-1. Incumbents begin each cycle with higher name recognition and a database of past contributors, making it easier to raise more money through small contributions from more people. They also typically make the decision to run earlier than challengers do — since a challenger often waits to see if the incumbent will run before making his choice — so they have more time to raise small contributions. And because campaign-finance regulations essentially require that candidates fill their coffers in small increments, the law clearly advantages the incumbents who passed it.

The effect of campaign-finance regulations has therefore been to help the people who passed them and to strengthen special interests, rather than to cleanse American politics of the influence of self-­interested ­factions. Even the well-meaning reformers, it appears, have failed at their stated goals.

This should surprise no one.

Of course, Palpatine was swept into office by folks tired of corruption. He is proud that rent-seeking is now done up front and openly, in the light of day, where everyone can see who is shafting who. That’s the first step towards controlling corruption.

He assures me we’ll get around to the second step someday.

"I promise to end corruption"