Full public funding of Federal Elections will cost just $6 a person

[JSAautomotive]

Congress would only have to spend $6 per citizen per year to publicly fund each and every election for the House, the Senate and the White House. When you consider that "pork barrel" projects cost every one of us more than $200 last year alone, it’s no contest.

Think of it. With public funding, wealthy special interests and their hired lobbyists would no longer have a commanding influence over our politics and government. Instead of begging for campaign donations, candidates would spend their time communicating with voters. Once elected, our leaders would be free to focus on our nation's challenges rather than having to worry about financing their next campaign. And there's no doubt that more of our most able leaders would run for federal office when the ability to finance a campaign isn't such a daunting obstacle.

Americans for Campaign Reform is building a nonpartisan grassroots movement of citizens who support voluntary public funding and want Congress to act now. We can make this happen. Public funding is already working in Arizona and Maine, and was just passed by the Connecticut legislature.

As citizens we can complain about the corrosive influence of our election finance system, or we can do something about it. With your help, we can mobilize citizens across the country and put pressure on Congress to enact real reform.
http://www.just6dollars.org

Notice.... it's sponsered by 2 dems and 2 repubs.

Lets see what the right wing has to say about this. Are you ready for non-elitists to run for Congress, Senate or the Presidency??

[JSAautomotive]

Ah.... I see. The right wing is not concerned with cleaning up politics??

[Drew L]

Think of it. With public funding, wealthy special interests and their hired lobbyists would no longer have a commanding influence over our politics and government. Instead of begging for campaign donations, candidates would spend their time communicating with voters. Once elected, our leaders would be free to focus on our nation's challenges rather than having to worry about financing their next campaign. And there's no doubt that more of our most able leaders would run for federal office when the ability to finance a campaign isn't such a daunting obstacle.



Learned two weeks out of a political-science class.............if not sooner

[UNGN]

This would create a "politician class" of Al Sharptons, David Dukes and Al Gores that traveled around the country on government dole.

If you try to limit the amount of candiates, what exactly would the difference be from what we have today, other than the two major parties wouldn't have to listen to anyone except the hardcore fascists or moonbats.

How long would it be before "just six dollars" became "just 10 dollars", then "just 15 dollars", etc? One election cycle?

Why not ask for REAL reform, like a Line item veto so the executive branch holds the legislative accountable?

[JSAautomotive]

Originally Posted by UNGN

Why not ask for REAL reform, like a Line item veto so the executive branch holds the legislative accountable?

That would be reverse politics. What if the administration were a bunch of crooks (like the ones currently). Then they could pick and choose the legislation "they" (the crooks) wanted, and the "checks and balances" that the Congress was originally intended to provide to the executive would be about as effective as Republicans and spending reform.

[UNGN]

Originally Posted by JSAautomotive

That would be reverse politics. What if the administration were a bunch of crooks (like the ones currently). Then they could pick and choose the legislation "they" (the crooks) wanted, and the "checks and balances" that the Congress was originally intended to provide to the executive would be about as effective as Republicans and spending reform.

...And the voters would hold them accountable.

We currently have a congress that votes for stuff and when it turns to sh1T they point at the other side and say "it was all their fault".

Accountability is the answer, not more government funding. <== the Democrat solution to everything

[JSAautomotive]

The problem you are missing is the special interest control these K street groups have on the current politican election system.

Tell us oh great Righty. What is your plan to remove the influence of the almighty $$ and the favors/paybacks with the current system?? Since you guys have all the answers anyway.

[BlownZ]

Originally Posted by JSAautomotive

Congress would only have to spend $6 per citizen per year to publicly fund each and every election for the House, the Senate and the White House. When you consider that "pork barrel" projects cost every one of us more than $200 last year alone, it’s no contest.

Think of it. With public funding, wealthy special interests and their hired lobbyists would no longer have a commanding influence over our politics and government. Instead of begging for campaign donations, candidates would spend their time communicating with voters. Once elected, our leaders would be free to focus on our nation's challenges rather than having to worry about financing their next campaign. And there's no doubt that more of our most able leaders would run for federal office when the ability to finance a campaign isn't such a daunting obstacle.

Americans for Campaign Reform is building a nonpartisan grassroots movement of citizens who support voluntary public funding and want Congress to act now. We can make this happen. Public funding is already working in Arizona and Maine, and was just passed by the Connecticut legislature.

As citizens we can complain about the corrosive influence of our election finance system, or we can do something about it. With your help, we can mobilize citizens across the country and put pressure on Congress to enact real reform.
http://www.just6dollars.org

Notice.... it's sponsered by 2 dems and 2 repubs.

Lets see what the right wing has to say about this. Are you ready for non-elitists to run for Congress, Senate or the Presidency??

I'd be all for this however we would have to have a way to control all the back door money. I think the money would still flow....it would just be hidden.

Let's face it...>Money buys Power.

[JSAautomotive]

Sad but true.

Another problem with this legislation is like having the fox guarding the hen house. There needs to be a citizen panel overseeing this process.

[chevyII]

I listened to a senator speak on this early this week,sounds promising. The concept is this you need the people to back you before you can apply to run. You would have to have town meetings and really sell yourself well.


I dont see any down side being that politicians now are can only speak to reporters that are all on first name basis. Or those great debates where the questions and anwsers are done days before.


The only way to make things right again is to totally eliminate the money. If that would happen the big wigs wouldnt want the job. I think a president and all of congress should work for the average wage of the country at the time of taking office. And if one dollar or one meal/trip was taken over that amount they would be fired/removed.

You should be made a millionare in office off our backs.

[Skylark-69]

A problem that immediately comes to mind is even without the pay, the perks are incredible. I'm not talking what the lobbyists do for them either since that would be gone.

[chevyII]

I by no means think its a refined idea but the general concept would be to elect those who have a genuine intentions on improving our country as the primary goal.

[JSAautomotive]

Originally Posted by Skylark

A problem that immediately comes to mind is even without the pay, the perks are incredible. I'm not talking what the lobbyists do for them either since that would be gone.

Thats why you would add laws that include jail time for such things. Perks, any sort of re-imbursement, etc. You can get the candidates to hand over their bank statements and tax returns for instance.