While following the volumulous and often contentious "What do you think of Lynda Hopkins" thread over the past few weeks, it became clear to me that all root cause of all of this angst is political campaigns financed by private "donations" -- particularly "donations" from corporations and dark money organizations. I put "donations" in quotes because they are not "donations" at all. They are "legalized bribes."
The 5th District Supervisorial contest is an archetype of how the private campaign donation system is destroying our democracy. Everything objectionable about the race is a result of the private donation system: the mystery candidates, the puppet show aspect, the "who is getting how much from where" bickering, candidates having to worry about where money is coming from and how that looks rather than discussing new ideas, and the fossil party hack who touts her ability to work the system.
Experience has shown that publicly-financed political campaigns makes it possible for average people to successfully run for public office, serve a term or two, and then return to private life -- negating the need for the professional politico class. It creates office-holders who work in the public's interest instead of serving "special interests." It does much to make government more creative, responsive and effective.
So what do you think of public campaign financing?
- Kirsten