Campaign Finance: If it’s broke, then fix it.

In Campaign-Finance Breakdown Mr. Bradley Smith, a former Federal Election Commission commissioner, and now chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics argues for the termination of public financing of campaigns. The essence of the argument is that since the influence of money can’t be controlled, we shouldn’t even try.

But while he sees the futility of trying to manage the role of money in politics, I see that we have no choice but to promote the impartiality, pragmatism and open mindedness of our representatives and judges. As global wealth increases, and concentrates, it becomes an almost insignificant investment to sway local public policy to benefit special interests over the wellbeing of average citizens. There needs to be an alternative for the typical candidate who choses to be independent. And that alternative is the public funding of competitive campaigns. So that the candidate can get enough money to equal the marketing reach and frequency of an opponent funded by a relatively few special interests.

Evolving circumstances will frustrate the mechanics of this funding. But where Mr. Smith prefers to give up, I encourage us to stay vigilant and keep up the good fight. Almost all of the leaks and weaknesses in past regulations can be addressed with refinements or even new approaches. What we may have learned over the past few years is that rather than limit how money can be spent it may be as simple as making sure a candidate has sufficient funds to match those promoting his opponents. Perhaps this reconciles the concerns for freedom of speech. Additionally it may be that a more appropriate source of the funds for public campaigns would be a tax on the media businesses that are the ultimate recipients of the campaign expenditures. After all, the public owns the airwaves and only licenses them to the private sector.

When we ponder that the cost of American government at all levels may be over $4 Trillion each year, then a few billion to promote the objectivity of representatives, while diminishing temptation to squander public funds, seems like a wise investment.