Money in Politics
Elections Should Be Won on Ideas, Not Fundraising
The Problem
American elections are an arms race funded by the wealthy. The average winning Senate campaign costs over $14 million. House races average $2 million. That money comes from somewhere — and it comes with expectations.
Citizens United opened the floodgates to unlimited corporate spending. Super PACs let billionaires buy influence while technically staying "independent." Dark money groups hide donors entirely. The result: elected officials spend more time fundraising than governing, and they answer to donors before constituents.
What We Propose
Full transparency — every dollar in politics should be traceable to a human being. No dark money. No shell corporations funneling cash through layers of nonprofits.
Hard caps on individual and organizational donations that are low enough to matter. When a single donor can write a check that exceeds most Americans' annual salary, the playing field isn't level.
Public financing of elections through small-dollar matching programs. New York City's 8-to-1 match on small donations proved that candidates can run competitive campaigns funded by regular people. Scale it nationally.
Ban stock trading by sitting members of Congress and their immediate families. You can't regulate industries you're personally invested in.
The Trade-offs
Campaign finance reform runs headlong into First Amendment arguments. The Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech. We disagree — money amplifies speech, and when some megaphones are a million times louder than others, that's not free speech, it's purchased speech.
Public financing costs taxpayer money. But the cost of a government that serves donors over citizens is incalculably higher — in bad policy, wasted spending, and lost trust.