The Case For Federally Funded Elections

Many people realize that one of the biggest problems we have with our electoral and legislative systems in this country are based in corporate control of our government. Many have focused on Citizens United in the belief that rescinding CU would solve this problem. However, this is not true. We had corporate money in politics and elections long before CU came along. Rescinding CU would be nothing but a symbolic measure which had no actual effect whatsoever.

Let’s begin with election campaigns. The majority of election campaigns are mostly funded by corporate and rich donors. Those donors don’t fund campaigns out of the goodness of their hearts or dedication to democracy. They fully expect to gain from those “donations” in the form of legislation favorable to them. Which they typically get.

The only real way that we can solve this issue is by federally funded elections. It would be more difficult to eliminate PACs, since SCOTUS ruled decades ago that corporate speech is free speech. That’s difficult to argue against without impacting other forms of free speech. However, by eliminating all direct donations to campaigns, we could have the potential to move the goalposts in our favor and reduce the so-called “debt” any candidate has to their “donors”.

Before I even launch into the advantages of federally funded elections, let me address the most common objection to it. That we would have to pay for it. The fact is, you already pay for election campaigns and lobbying. You pay for it with every…