Trip to Albany renews drive for clean elections

Amy Dowley Guest Writer

Consider this: if basketball were pay-to-play, Bill Gates-style billionaires would shoot free throws and great players like Michael Jordan and Adonal Foyle of the Golden State Warriors would never have the chance to dunk in the big leagues. The NBA would be full of mediocre players whose Benjamins counted more than their jumps. You might think this is just hypothetical, but it is actually the same predicament the U.S. political system is currently facing. The ability for money to dominate politics is destroying the fundamental framework of our democracy.

This issue was at the heart of the sixth annual Democracy Matters summit in Albany, held Feb. 17 to Feb. 19. Members of Vassar’s group gathered together with other activists from around the country to educate themselves about the ways in which important political issues are affected by campaign donations. Vassar students returned to campus inspired, energized, and ready to spread the positive message of public finance reform and clean elections to the citizens of their local communities.

Democracy Matters’ sole purpose as an organization is to promote clean elections across the nation. We are not the only group involved in this struggle, but in embracing this one particular issue, the organization distinguishes itself from other political groups on campus. The condition of lobbyist money controlling our political dialogue and drowning out the concerns of the people is a problem that everyone should acknowledge, regardless of political affiliation.

Campaign finance reform runs up against traditional arguments of free speech. However, contesting clean elections as an infringement of first amendment rights is preposterous, considering that private donations currently push the general populace out of politics. Under the present system the top one percent of Americans contribute 80 percent of the total donations that shape our country’s policies.

Campaigning representatives also become victims to private funding. Most politicians can’t afford to take the time to listen to their constituents, because they need to fund their campaigns by appealing to the big-time donors—elites and corporations.

If candidates are instead given the opportunity to use public funding, then votes, not dollars, come first. Public funding provides candidates from diverse socio-economic backgrounds a greater opportunity to run in elections and win. Therefore, by undermining the power of private money in politics, you actually enhance free speech for individual voters and open the floor to a broader range of issues that may not interest corporations and the rich.

Environmental issues are some of those “alternative” concerns that receive less attention on the national scene and it is no wonder, considering our nation’s president alone pocketed $2.6 million from oil and gas interest donors in the 2003-2004 election cycle. I could also mention the recently passed polluter-friendly Clear Skies Act of 2006. Charged on $15 million of contributions from electric utilities and another $2.2 million in donations scrounged from the coal mining industry’s piggy bank, this bill was “out bid” by the corporate king pins 17 to one: environmentalists contributed less than $2 million towards the effort (opensecrets.org).

Considering the donation gap, it’s not surprising then that the new Clean Skies Act effectively makes no provisions for carbon dioxide emissions and is framed to allow large plants to pay their way out of improving emission standards. Coincidence that laws and loot go hand-in-hand? I think not.

The Clean Skies Act of 2006 is only one example where cash diverts politicians from taking action that would greatly improve the well-being of the people of our nation. Money blinds our leaders to real solutions.

Imagine, then, a political system in which politicians rely on public funding to assist them with election campaigns, a system in which candidates worry less about costs and concern themselves with issues directly affecting constituents.

The environment, women, gender concerns, public health and other “anti-corporate” issues would be priorities because candidates would no longer fear that losing corporate-fed donations will spell personal bankruptcy, the loss of the election, or both. With the corporate crutch finally broken, leaders would look to us, the people, and Americans can finally rekindle that democratic spirit of one person one vote.

Maybe this is just a vision, but with campaign finance reform, the opportunity for a new day, a cleaner day, becomes that much more of a tangible reality.