Public Funding of Election Campaigns
Citizens for Responsible Government believes that our elected officials
should seriously consider public funding of elections for individuals competing
for county, state, and federal offices in Alabama.
We believe such a move would save candidates the indignity of asking for
money to run for office and would insure that candidates are not beholden to
those who have funded their campaigns. We
further suggest that
Public funding of elections does not mean anyone can run for office on a whim. A possible candidate would be required to raise a small amount of money from individuals to become a viable candidate. For example, a person running for the state senate might be required to raise $5 contributions from 200 people to be eligible for state election funds. This candidate and their opponents could receive up to a set amount, say $10,000, to run for state senate. If a candidate chose to raise money privately and accumulated more than the public funding allowance for that position, his or her opponent would receive an equal amount from the public fund to insure a financially equitable race, even if the amount exceeded the public funding limit. Such a structure discourages candidates from raising extremely large amounts of money in order to "buy an election" by out advertising their opponents.
A companion component to public funding of elections is direct discussion and debate of issues by candidates. To receive public funding, all candidates receiving such funding would be required to disclose their positions on issues relevant to the campaign on a web site sponsored by the state's public funding agency. Candidates' positions would also be circulated to the media by the same state agency. Candidates receiving public funding would also be required to discuss and debate their positions on broadcast forums and town hall meetings sponsored by the public funding agency. Issues considered relevant to each campaign would be determined by citizens entering suggestions on a web site maintained by the public funding agency.
Candidates receiving public funding would be required to agree to "fact in advertising" proviso to receive funding. These candidates would have to provide a substantive factual base for claims made in any political ads regarding their own or their opponent's positions or records. This factual information would be included on the public funding agency's web site. The purpose of this proviso is to prevent misleading "attack" ads. Candidates not receiving public funding would be asked to agree to the same proviso and would have their acceptance or rejection of the agreement posted on the same web site.