by Larry Head

Created on: November 21, 2007   Last Updated: March 19, 2008

I firmly believe that a taxpayer funded election campaigns flies in the very face of the constitution as well as the vision the founders had for the fledgling republic which they founded.

As a voter, and a taxpayer, I want individuals running for elected office who have achieved something of value with the life god granted them. The perception that a successful and wealthy person is that way because they "took" it from someone else, while prevalent is ludicrous. And yet it fuels this argument for taxpayer funded elections. A person may have the money to fund their campaign, yet if they can not win the war of ideas, if they can't compete in the realm of ideology and personality, that money does not matter.

Removing the impetus to make the most of your own money by substituting it with mine, removes the necessity for a participant to win the war of ideas. Since they will no more, and no less than their competitor, they can simply run some personal attack ads against each other and the public will be forced to chose between candidates with no appreciable position on the issues that matter most to those particular voters.

When you have to either spend your own money, or raise money from like minded people or both, you are more likely to ensure that you get the most bang for your buck. When that money is "FREE" money, who cares if a particular strategy is effective, just spend some more. Taxpayer funded elections remove the incentive for a candidate to ensure that the money spent is spent well and provides value for each dollar spent.

Those who constantly promote taxpayer funding, are those who understand that in reality they can not win in the realm of ideas. a free market is not fair, however, it has a way of sorting out those things which work and those which do not.

Learn more about this author, Larry Head.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.