Just $6 - In The News

Rich Candidates Abound as Presidential Campaign Costs Rise

Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:57:04 -0500

US INFO correspondent Ralph Dannheisser outlines yet another benefit of being rich: election to public office.

The 2008 candidates are rich:

Chances are strong that the next U.S. president will be a millionaire. All three Democratic front-runners and all four of the top Republican contenders fall into that category.

And access to loads of campaign money is more important than ever:

Access to funding has assumed tremendous importance in this era of almost nonstop election campaigns and huge advertising expenses. Hundreds of millions of dollars will be spent in the current presidential campaign cycle.

Just $6 on ABC 7

Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:00:07 -0500

Watch this special news coverage of former Senators Bill Bradley and Al Simpson reaching across party lines to support publicly funded federal elections. Check out the end for a great moment from Senator Simpson.

Opinion: Proposal could rein in high cost of running for Congress

Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:00:09 -0500

Chicago Sun-Times, Chicago, IL
March 26, 2007

One of the biggest flaws of modern democracy is the skyrocketing cost of getting elected, particularly to Congress. The huge expense distorts the process in many ways: It forces candidates to spend more and more of their time raising money and eliminates candidates unable or unwilling to do that. It raises the influence of special interests with deep pockets, and creates at the very least the perception -- and in some notorious recent cases, the reality -- that votes are for sale.

Opinion: Solid plan offered on election financing

Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:00:11 -0500

The Post-Tribune, Chicago, IL
March 27, 2007

Election financing reform is one of the most talked-about issues in Washington. It rarely moves beyond the talking stage.

Last week's introduction of the Fair Elections Reform Act offers new promise for the imposition of spending limits and public financing for elections to Congress.

For the first time, an election-financing reform bill was introduced with bipartisan support. Sens. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa., are the authors.

The proposal, which is patterned after what some cities and states have imposed, would return elections to the voters and drastically reduce the role of big special-interest money that has negatively affected our election process.

Opinion: Quieting big money

Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:19:56 -0500

If lawmakers are serious about reforming Maryland's tax code in the near future, they ought to reform the state's campaign finance laws first. The reason is simple: Tax laws are filled with loopholes and inequities because big political donors wield enormous influence. That's just as true in Annapolis as it is in Washington. And it will always be true - unless legislators embrace the public financing of campaigns.

Want the General Assembly to pass your bill? Any lobbyist worth his Guccis will tell you that you first have to donate money to the appropriate pols. Lawmakers may claim they aren't swayed by donations, but even the most adamant defenders will admit there's at least an appearance of impropriety.

Panel Discussion in NYC on 2/27

Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:32:16 -0400

What: Please join us in NYC to discuss:

The impact of money on our political system,
The different approaches to solving the problem including ethics reform, and
Regulation of lobbying activity and public funding of elections.

Who: A panel discussion featuring:

Senator Warren G. Rudman, former U.S. Senator from New Hampshire, as he speaks for the first time about why he now supports public funding of federal elections.
Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen
John Rauh, founder and president of Americans for Campaign Reform

Campaign finance reform: Rauh wows Weston crowds

Thu, 05 Oct 2006 11:13:02 -0400

For just $6 per citizen, the face of political elections could change completely.

John Rauh, founder and president of Americans for Campaign Reform (ACR), brought this new and relatively controversial concept to Weston last weekend — and, in the process, created some converts to his cause.

Mr. Rauh, an advocate of public campaign funding, was in town last week to speak to the Kiwanis Club and students at Weston High School about campaign finance reform for elected federal officials.

A film crew from the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) was on hand to film the speech at the Kiwanis Club for a documentary it is developing on a subject that is gathering a great deal of national attention. ...“There are important issues facing this country. The challenges this nation and the world face are huge,” Mr. Rauh said.

Money chase distorts our election process

Wed, 27 Sep 2006 10:43:27 -0400

Does democracy have a price?

How about $64 a vote? That's how much Dorrin Rolle spent for every vote cast in his favor in the Sept. 5 primaries. The Miami-Dade commissioner raised $408,060 to get 6,379 votes, for a job that pays $6,000 a year. Rolle's competitor, Phillip Brutus, spent $17.28 a vote -- enough to buy every sympathetic voter a bottle of Malbec, but not enough to win him the office.

The other winners for County Commission averaged somewhere in between:Katy Sorenson: $30 a vote. Rebeca Sosa, $31.65 a vote. The losers didn't come close. Take Millie Herrera, who spent just $5.45 a vote. Javier Souto outspent her by more than $25 a vote -- and won.

Vermont tried

Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:46:48 -0400

In a case called Randall et al. v. Sorrell et al., the U.S. Supreme Court has trashed Vermont's 1997 effort at campaign-finance reform. It was yet another indication that these are tough times in America for reformers who think of themselves as progressives, and heady times for those who call themselves conservatives.

This week's 6-3 decision involved six written opinions, which must be read as tea leaves. In the end, a majority of the justices left standing the controversial 1976 Buckley v. Valeo case, which equates political money with political speech but permits states to limit campaign contributions. The justices found Vermont's Act 64 unconstitutional in limiting how much candidates for state office could spend to get themselves elected, and they determined that the limits were too strict on how much money supporters could donate to candidates.

Six bucks could fix nation's pilfered politics

Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:05:08 -0400

Imagine a system where our politicians are more responsive, our candidates focus on real issues, the special interest groups have limited influence, and "pork barrel" politics is cut down to size.

Now, imagine that this new system would cost you $6 a year.

Does that sound like a good deal?

Public funding of elections is the solution that could transform our nation's politics, according to a new group called Americans for Campaign Reform, co-chaired by four prominent former senators -- Warren Rudman, Alan Simpson, Bill Bradley and Bob Kerrey. They propose that federal money -- taxpayers' dollars -- finance the elections for the U.S. House, Senate and president.

The cost, $1.8 billion a year -- or $6 per U.S. citizen -- would replace the special interest dollars and contributions from lobbyists that currently fund much of our election system. The same type of process could be employed at the state level in Michigan, much like the public financing that's already working in Arizona and Maine.

It's no surprise that Michigan's elections are so non-competitive. Few races for state House and Senate generate a real campaign because the incumbents enjoy a massive advantage in raising dollars from the interest groups, the political action committees.

We can take price tag off democracy for just $6

Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:09:53 -0400

Recent scandals have shed light on Washington's toxic triangle of special interest money, elections and governing. The fundamental flaw is our reliance on private donations for financing our congressional and presidential elections, a system that encourages corruption and alienates our citizens.

There is a strong case for proposals like more disclosure or a ban on lobbyist sponsored trips, but even the toughest lobbying reforms will only tweak the rules of the game, not change the game itself. More radical action is needed. The obvious solution is to replace the private financing system of federal elections with voluntary public financing.

I hesitate to guess how many hours I devoted to attending fundraisers during my 12 years in Washington. At the outset of my political career, I was not enamored with the idea of voluntary public financing. But times have changed, and so have I.

Media

Wed, 06 Feb 2008 11:28:33 -0500

Video and Podcasts

(Click the icon that looks like an open book to view the Channel Guide for all videos and podcasts)

Former senators push for public financing of federal elections

Mon, 15 May 2006 15:07:33 -0400

WASHINGTON -- Former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley said Thursday he was appalled when Jon Corzine used more than $60 million of his own money to run in the state's 2000 U.S. Senate race.

Former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson said he was disgusted at how much time he and his colleagues had to spend fundraising for themselves and others while they really should have been tending to Senate business.

The two have teamed up with former Sens. Bob Kerrey of Nebraska and Warren Rudman of New Hampshire in a bipartisan effort to have Congress publicly fund every federal election in the country. The four senators say it will take just $6 per citizen to prevent wealthy special interest groups and lobbyists from greatly influencing politicians.

Rauh launches plan for public election fund

Mon, 15 May 2006 14:35:14 -0400

John Rauh believes the mood of the country shows the time is right for a serious discussion of public financing of federal elections.

With recent scandals in Congress and Americans showing an overall discontent with the status quo, Rauh, a veteran New Hampshire political activist and one-time Democratic U.S. Senate candidate, has launched a national push for federal legislation he believes will allow more people to seriously run for political office.

Rauh, 73, is a former board member of Common Cause. Three years ago, he founded the non-profit, non-partisan Americans for Campaign Reform, a 501(c)(3), with the catch-phrase, "Just Six Dollars."

You shouldn't have to grovel to run for office

Mon, 15 May 2006 14:24:03 -0400

The way political campaigns are financed in America is a disgrace. The system leaves elected officials beholden to special interests. It keeps some good people from running because, whatever the merit of their ideas, they cannot raise enough money to compete against incumbents or very wealthy candidates. Others don't run because they can't bring themselves to dial for dollars day after day.

The system makes it nearly impossible to unseat a sitting member of Congress. The re-election rate is 98 percent.

It doesn't have to be that way, says John Rauh, a New Hampshire Democrat who ran for the U.S. Senate in 1992 and 1996. Rauh met with the Monitor'seditorial board yesterday. He is trying to sell the nation on the public financing of federal elections.