An Un-American Plan for Election Financing: Why I Still Like Al Franken

Throughout American history, the notion that financial status should be equated with political power has been pretty consistent. Originally, only property owners had the right to vote in this country [link]. Nowadays, corporations donate millions to political parties, and spend even more on lobbying. Good financing does not necessarily guarantee a candidate victory, however, a lack of financing is certainly a guarantee of failure. This is the American way. In the case of Buckley V. Valeo in 1976 [link], the Supreme Court declared mandatory limits on campaign expenditures to be contrary to the First Amendment. In essence, it is unconstitutional to stop wealthy candidates from exercising the advantages that their wealth provides.

It seems to me that publicly financing elections would be the most influential legislation since FDR's New Deal. Can you imagine candidates looking out for the actual interests of their constituents, rather than the interests of the lobbies which support them?

I am not saying that all politicians are necessarily slave to the wealthy contributors who support them (although I am sure there are many who are), but a party who's platform can not find substantial financial backing is certainly doomed to fail. In order for a candidate to be successful, he or she must be acceptable to a party, and parties can not exist without financial backing. Those with wealth will not support a party which supports candidates who don't serve their interests. The result of this is to concentrate power in the hands of only those who have been deemed acceptable by individuals and other entities with wealth, and to limit the discourse to issues which do not threaten the dominance of the wealthy supporters. These entities are for the most part corporations and other similar groups, with a few notable exceptions such as labor unions and interest groups, whose influence has faded significantly in recent decades.

Of course, Al Franken is hardly the first person to mention something like this, and it has actually been successfully enacted in some states, but what I like about him, unlike most other Democratic pundits, is that he is not content focusing only on the talking points of the party, but rather tries to work within the party to set a more progressive agenda. Another example of this is the issue of national health care, which Franken adamantly supports unlike the Democratic Party.