2 of 18

Yes

Write now Article Tools

Not only should the US government help fund election campaigns, the government should provide a fixed and finite medium for all candidates. No campaign "funds" per se would eliminate the lobbyists, the back-door politics and the glass ceiling which precludes the less wealthy from running for public office.

Instead of financing an election, the government should provide a set amount of media exposure for each and every candidate, from local to national elections. A specific number of newspaper features, a fixed number of radio announcements and a fixed number of televised debates. Included in these infomercials, candidates would be required to show past voting records and projects completed.

By eliminating contributions to the electoral process, wealth would no longer be an issue. Candidates would get equal air time and be required to publicize what they have actually done in the past. They would not be as likely to bend their integrity for the sake of election funding. Individuals who might not consider running for office due to financial constraints but who might be better qualified and more honest may be willing to try running if money weren't an issue.

Government funding of elections would remove the more criminal element from the election process and open up the field to citizens who would run, not for the money, but for the protection of our rights and property, to make a positive difference in the world.

Learn more about this author, Kate Johnson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should the US government help fund election campaigns??
We want to hear your view. Write now!