One Utah

I’m pleased to see that Congress has scheduled (and taken the first of) votes on a series of measures designed to drain the swamp of corruption created by Republicans over the last few years. It’s a move in the right direction. Since 1995, Lobbyists have made a fortune for their industries by writing legislation that favored their industries which Republicans then passed. Breaking the links between lobbyists and politicians is one of the most important tasks facing we the people over the next few years. Last night, the new majority leaders in congress held a $1000/person fundraiser. I’m not criticizing them for holding the fundraiser - the political reality is that parties need money and there’s currently one way to get it - fundraising.

If we want real, long term political reform, if we want an end to political corruption, if we want an end to the current system which favors the wealthy and connected, we need real, long term effective campaign finance reform - not something that tinkers around the edges (McCain-Feingold I’m looking at you!).

We need public financing of elections. We need an absolute ban on gifts to elected officials. We need clean elections.

Here’s my not entirely thought out proposal:

First, pass a law that says if you are an elected official you cannot receive gifts from lobbyists, corporations, or individuals of any amount or kind - not one thin dime, not a bagel, not a tie, not a purse, nothing. Nada.

Second, create a national non-profit organization to which individuals can donate to support elections and to which donations are tax deductible like any charity. This NPO would be tasked with maintaining and delivering truly non-partisan voter guides showing candidates stances on issues of concern as well as accurate voting records for candidates; this NPO would also have of course a webiste and searchable databases of votes. This kind of information is vital; I’ve heard of instances where candidates are accused of voting against something 17 times when in fact they were voting on procedural issues related to a bill concerning issue X but in fact they voted for the final bill. This National Voter Information Board (that’s my working name) would cut through that kind of crap and give voters reliable information; Congressperson X voted against The Dead Bird Rescusitation Act; here is the statement from his/her office as to why. By running this NPO in truly non-partisan fashion and dedicating it resources to providing accurate, reliable information it would establish a trustworthy final source of information to which voters could turn and which voters would rely. Accurate information about candidates and officials would be a boon to voters. By making donations to it tax deductible, I think it would receive donations. It would also require funding from the government but not a huge amount - we’re not talking billions of dollars.

Third, create a clean election system in which candidates who achieve a minimum of support qualify for public financing of their campaigns. Set the level of support low, but not unreasonably so - perhaps candidates have to have 2% of the registered voters in their district sign a petition; once they have those signatures, they receive public financing. Allow candidates to finance the old way if they want with hours spend dialing for dollars. If one candidate privately funds and another publicly, the public funded candidates receives 85% of the private funded monies - after all it costs some money to raise money. If both publicly finance, it’s easy to find costs of media and publishing and so forth to arrive a reasonable figure for each to receive. Candidates who publicly finance would be held to a high standard of honesty in campaign literature and websites and so forth. Public financing allows candidates to run for office without becoming indebted to campaign donors who then look for favors. Create public financing at all levels. Public financing of campaigns would also allow more vigorous debate - by levelling the playing field of money, it would permit more ideas to be aired and debated. I believe it would also attract more qualified candidates - one’s ability to ask for money from rich people and corporations is unrelated to one’s ability to govern (see George W. Bush for proof of this!). Many qualified candidates stay out of politics because of the expense of campaigns, the complications of fundraising.

As I said, I’m still pondering and there are some details I’m done thinking about. I’m not sure how we would fund political parties. Perhaps parties could and should be publicly funded. Dependence on massive donations from industries has created a situation in which politicians and parties favor policies that favor their donors. If parties received funding (or could opt to receive public funding) for their operating expenses it might result in parties actually focusing on good policy rather than benefitting their big donors at the expense of the rest of us. We also need stricter requirements about disclosure. Turns out that during the 2006 election, in South Dakota, an organization was created to allow a single individual to run ads in favor of that state’s abortion ban; this organization has yet to reveal the name of the individual or how much money he gave. Obviously, shenanigans will take place in any system and individuals will flout or find ways around the law. People will find ways to break the rules.

There would always be issues and propositions and initiatives on ballots. Some are colorless and would require little by way of campaigns for and against, but others would have significant campaigns for and against and would benefit from qualifying for public financing.

We also know at the outset that Republicans will oppose any public financing of campaigns and that they will complain that public financing is biased against them. How equal funding is biased will never be addressed or answered but it will be asserted. We know that Republicans will oppose any reforms designed to reduce the influence of industries and lobbyists in politics.

I believe and I hope that public financing of campaigns would result in more involvement of more people in elections, that more people would trust the system and that the system would be more responsive to the needs of the people. I know a lot of people “check out” of politics because they believe they can’t influence the system because they don’t have lots of money or armies of lobbyists. Levelling the playing field between lobbyists and industries and average citizens would be an amazing and valuable service and would reduce the sense of cynicism about our political system.

Finally, public financing of campaigns has the potential to become a public trough at which greedy and corrupt politicians feed. Safeguards would have to be in place to guarantee that campaign financing would not become corrupt and that it remain reliable. I’d like to see to jail time for any politician who abused public financing. I have no illusions about the ability of corrupt and cynical politicians and parties to undermine the best intended public policy to serve their own ends. I know this however - our current system of campaign financing allows the wealthy, powerful and connected to purchase our government. That has to end. I believe reforming campaign finance laws and breaking the connections between lobbyists and elected officials will go a long way toward ending the corruption in our government.

This entry was posted Saturday, January 6th, 2007 at 8:26 am and is filed under Democracy, Elections, National Politics, Political Corruption, This Blog, Voting Rights. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.