TL;DR
Recent insights challenge the idea that small-dollar donors moderate politics. Instead, they tend to be highly partisan and contribute to increased polarization, complicating efforts to reform campaign finance.
Recent research and political developments suggest that small-dollar donors are not the moderating force some believed them to be. Instead, they are highly partisan, contributing to increased political polarization and influencing campaign strategies in ways that may undermine efforts at reform. This shift challenges longstanding assumptions about grassroots contributions and their role in balancing big money in politics.
In the 2024 elections, small donors have played a significant role, with contributions surpassing those of large donors in some races. For example, in Colorado’s Fourth Congressional District, nearly $7.4 million of the total campaign funding for Democrat Eileen Laubacher came from donors contributing less than $200. Despite their grassroots appearance, recent studies, including work by Zachary Albert and Raymond La Raja, show that small donors tend to be highly partisan, often supporting extreme candidates and contributing to political polarization.
Research indicates that small donors are generally wealthier, older, whiter, and more educated than the average electorate, and their giving patterns are highly nationalized. They tend to support ideologically extreme figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Marjorie Taylor Greene, often out of state, which can distort local political priorities. Experts like Anthony Fowler note that large donors, including corporate interests, are more likely to support moderate or strategic candidates, contrasting with small donors’ preferences.
While the idea that small donors could counterbalance big money gained traction after landmark Supreme Court rulings like Citizens United, evidence suggests their influence may be more polarizing than moderating. The rise of online donation platforms has amplified this effect, with small donors’ contributions growing exponentially, yet their impact on reducing polarization remains questionable.
Impact of Small Donors on Political Polarization
The perception that small donors serve as a moderating force in US politics is increasingly challenged by recent findings. Instead, their highly partisan giving patterns contribute to greater polarization, making bipartisan consensus more difficult and complicating efforts to reform campaign finance laws. This development raises questions about the effectiveness of relying on grassroots funding as a counterbalance to big money influence.
HOW TO USE CROWDFUNDING PLATFORMS EFFECTIVELY: Launch, Fund, and Grow Your Big Idea
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Evolution of Campaign Finance and Donor Behavior
Since the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010, the landscape of campaign finance has shifted dramatically. The ruling allowed unlimited contributions from corporations and wealthy individuals, leading to the rise of super PACs and dark-money groups. In response, small donors became seen as a potential force to counterbalance this influence, especially with the growth of online platforms like ActBlue and WinRed. However, recent research indicates that small donors are not the moderating influence once hoped for, and their contributions often reinforce ideological extremes.
Historically, large donors and institutional interests supported more moderate candidates, but data from recent elections show that small donors’ preferences lean toward more ideologically extreme figures, often out of state. This trend has contributed to increased polarization at both local and national levels, with the 2024 elections exemplifying this pattern.
“Small donors are disproportionately drawn to ideologically extreme candidates and tend to support out-of-state figures, which exacerbates polarization.”
— Anthony Fowler, University of Chicago
small dollar donation online tools
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Unclear Impact of Small Donors on Future Politics
It remains uncertain whether the current trends in small donor behavior will persist or shift in future elections. The extent to which small donors could be mobilized for moderate or bipartisan causes, or whether reforms can alter their influence, is still under debate. Additionally, the long-term effects of their polarization-fueling contributions are not yet fully understood.
![Express Schedule Free Employee Scheduling Software [PC/Mac Download]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41yvuCFIVfS._SL500_.jpg)
Express Schedule Free Employee Scheduling Software [PC/Mac Download]
Simple shift planning via an easy drag & drop interface
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Next Steps in Campaign Finance and Donor Research
Researchers and policymakers will likely continue studying small donor behavior and its effects on polarization. Campaign finance reforms aimed at increasing transparency and encouraging moderate contributions may be proposed, but their effectiveness remains to be seen. The 2024 election cycle will serve as a key indicator of whether small donors can evolve into a moderating force or continue to deepen partisan divides.
Applied Economic Analysis for Technologists, Engineers, and Managers
Author: Michael S. Bowman.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Are small donors actually helping to moderate politics?
Current research suggests that small donors tend to support highly partisan and extreme candidates, contributing to increased polarization rather than moderation.
How much do small donors contribute compared to large donors?
In recent elections, small donors have contributed more than large donors in some races, with their total contributions reaching billions of dollars, especially through online platforms.
Can reforms change the influence of small donors?
It is uncertain whether new campaign finance laws or reforms can shift small donors toward supporting more moderate candidates or reduce their polarizing impact.
Why do small donors tend to support extreme candidates?
Studies indicate that small donors are often motivated by ideological commitment and are less influenced by strategic considerations, leading them to support more extreme figures.
Source: The Atlantic
