There are many different forms of the public funding system, and some are welcomed more than others. The most common system is one of VOLUNTARY public funding, in which candidates who recieve approximately 2000 qualifying contributions of $5 each recieve a set amount of public funds if they decide not to recieve any financial support from private sources, such as public advocacy groups. So, for example, if a Mr. Smith from Ohio wants to access this public funding option, he is required to get 2000 American voters to give him contributions of $5 each. Once Mr. Smith has been able to show that he has significant public support from raising 2000 contributions of $5 each, he recieves supposedly adequate sums to run an effective campaign. The alleged result, according to advocates, is that because Mr. Smith no longer has to worry about fundraising, and is no longer obligated to "special interest groups", he is now able to focus on constituents's concerns.
Those who oppose public funding base their side on the quotation from Thomas Jefferson: "To compel a man to furnish money for views and opinions he abhors is sinful and tyrannical." The majority of public financing systems do not allow a taxpayer to specify what candidate he or she wants their tax dollars to go, and thus these systems are alleged to violate the taxypayers' right to choice. Regardless of the outcome on the integrity of our electoral process, opponents state that the right to choose not to give money to a campaign must be protected.
Opponents also state that, as Ronald Reagan said, "government is not the solution, it is the problem."They don't want more government regulations and interference. Advocates, such as the political organization Public Campaign, state that "public funding is not about more regulations, but simply different ones. There are already laws and regulations governing the way campaigns are handled. The problem is that they do not work."
Regardless of the benefit on the electoral process, government intervention should not be allowed to thrive in a society of free people. Advocates of public funding say that the system is "for the common good." The basis of communism is "for the common good." Public funding is just another way for government to get involved with the lives of a free society, and take away our freedoms.
<--Back to the Campaign Finance Reform Educational Services
