In the most recent edition of the Albany Journal, Jim Finkelstein wrote a letter to the editor regarding how our elected officials are bought and paid for by special interests. Through the vast majority of the letter, I found myself in complete agreement. That is, until I got to the last paragraph that said “Leadership can only come from the top, and we can only hope that President Obama will realize at sme point that until we eliminate all of the barely legal forms of bribery which currently exist and switch to publicly financed electoral contests, he will never be able to achieve meaningful reform in any area.”
While I agree that special interests have gotten too powerful in this nation, public financing of elections ain’t going to cut it for a whole lot of reasons.
First, let’s examine how every other part of our electoral process works. Currently, matching campaign funds doesn’t happen for every candidate, only the “viable” ones. Make no mistake, publicly funded elections would do the same, meaning third party or independent candidates wouldn’t get a thing. If, and I seriously doubt this would actually happen, but if everyone got money, the amount would be paltry. Without funds, candidates would struggle to get their message out, and we would slide even further down the slope of going based on ideas like “he looks trustworthy” or “she’s kind of hot” as valid ways to decide a candidate.
Second, there’s the fact that public financing of elections is just plain wrong. Doing so requires that I not donate to the candidate of my choice, meaning I’m being restricted from financial support of the person I most believe in. This does, contrary to what many will tell you, invalidate my freedom of speech. Yes, money can equal speech when it helps by TV or radio advertising, signs, or any number of other necessities to a campaign. Any politician, on any level, will tell you how important it is to get your name and message out to the population. If you don’t, you’re candidacy is dead. This favors incumbents over challengers as well, which isn’t good when you’re wanting to reform something.
It is through our elections that we state our feelings in voices loud enough that the whole world hears them. It is through elections that we can achieve reform. Even if special interests were prevented from giving money to candidates in any way, shape or form, including prevention from “swift boating” candidates, they would still wield considerable power as their membership can vote and potentially swing entire elections.
I also take issue with the attitude of the President being “the top”. It’s far to common, but remember that we are the real “top”. He ultimately answers to us, the American people. Again, it is through elections that he answers to us. We the People carry all the real power in this nation. If you want reform, rally your friends and neighbors and if enough of them stand with you, you’ll achieve that reform. No politician survives long by going against the people, and it doesn’t require tax dollars being spent in an economy that FDR would look at and say “better you than me pal.” It doesn’t require a change in laws. It simple requires a change in attitudes.
The government getting involved in any issue is a terrible idea. They have shown time and time again that they can screw up anything. So why let them get into campaign financing? Let the people decide where their money should go, and let the people decide if the special interests (which I despise as well) should have the say in American government that they currently do. It’s the only way to do it in a free country.
