There is no consistent correlation between money and U.S. federal electoral success, when other factors such as incumbency are controlled for.
Even the Sunlight Foundation, in studying the 2012 federal election, concluded that the increased outside spending had no measurable effect.
The idea that the U.S. electoral system is hostage to big money interests is largely a myth. While Congress as a whole has very low approval ratings, most members of Congress have good approval ratings in their districts and states. In addition, the policy platforms being pursued by those members of Congress also enjoy strong approval from their voters.
The system actually does work. The problem is that voters disagree with each other vehemently on a number of issues, and therefore demand that their elected representatives achieve ideological victory in both directions at once.
Even the Sunlight Foundation, in studying the 2012 federal election, concluded that the increased outside spending had no measurable effect.
The idea that the U.S. electoral system is hostage to big money interests is largely a myth. While Congress as a whole has very low approval ratings, most members of Congress have good approval ratings in their districts and states. In addition, the policy platforms being pursued by those members of Congress also enjoy strong approval from their voters.
The system actually does work. The problem is that voters disagree with each other vehemently on a number of issues, and therefore demand that their elected representatives achieve ideological victory in both directions at once.