Public funding for elections

To the Editor:

There is good reason to reject candidates who rely on “traditional funding” in elections. The reason is that “traditional funding” often includes corporate and special interest money, the single biggest Root Cause pathology in our democracy. Until America cures that pathology we citizens can’t be sure our votes will elect those who will serve our needs first above all others. For our votes to matter most we must establish policy for 100 percent Public Funding of elections and to control lobbyists. That may seem like a daunting task but it isn’t. Just take a moment and imagine:

a) If citizens establish that policy no candidate could survive opposing it;

b) Elected officials will have freedom to place our concerns first;

c) There is huge disincentive for “unwholesome types” to run for office;

d) Citizen participation in our democracy would greatly improve.

It’s all Win-Win, no downside (except for corporatists) — and that’s only the beginning.

A telling reply to this policy is often some version of: “I can’t burden the public more during these hard times.” That fails the logic test. We need only ask ourselves which is more expensive, a few bucks per year for truly clean elections “of, by and for the people” or, fighting moneyed corporations and allowing them to continue buying our government and strangling our future?

For the sake of American democracy and our personal well-being we must establish Public Funding of elections and limit the influence of corporate and ideological entities in our legislative processes. The Fair Elections Act, S.752 is a critically important first step.

Seabury Lyon

Bethel