Democracy: money versus votes in Africa

Money sometimes speaks louder than votes. This study provides estimates of the money involved when candidates seek political office as members of parliament or as president.

We show that the demand for financing electoral campaigns has accelerated in both Tanzania and (especially) Uganda since the economic and political liberalisation of the 1990s and early 2000s, as has the supply of campaign money.

Indeed, our evidence suggests that Tanzania’s and Uganda’s 2015 and 2016 elections were the most expensive ever. Demand is spurred by the benefits of holding political office, and by increased inter- and intra-party competition for votes. The money involved in the presidential campaigns are particularly large. They were higher in Tanzania and much higher in Uganda during the 2010s than in the USA in percentage of the GDP.

Other main findings: 

• legislation and enforcement of campaign financing regulations are weak, especially in Uganda
• the incumbent party candidates outspend the opposition significantly in both the parliamentary and the presidential elections in both countries
• female members of parliament generally spent as much or more on election campaigns as male candidates
• the supply of plutocratic financing by larger, mainly domestic, private companies – especially to fund the presidential candidates of the ruling parties – has grown; and
• providing campaign financing improves the bargaining positions of larger campaign finance donors vis-à-vis the incumbent presidents and parties – probably more so than does their payments of taxes to the state

One obvious impact of the significant volumes of money for campaign financing is therefore that the democratic playing field is not level. The opposition tends to be disadvantaged.