• Topic- Campaign finance reform
• Purpose- To persuade all Americans that a $1 contribution from any U.S. citizen is all that is necessary to fund a responsible political campaign and more than what’s necessary corrupts and excludes most American voters.
• Thesis- Large campaign contributions have always corrupted American politics and excluded the voices of most Americans. If we allow for only $1 campaign contributions all Americans can become equally invested in our political system and at the same time reduce political corruption.
• Goal- Less money more votes
INTRODUCTION
Free speech is not enough; a democracy that speaks for everyone requires equal speech as much as it requires free speech. Freedom without equality corrupts and corrodes democracy. When we give or take more than other Americans can give we discriminate against and exclude these Americans, we corrupt our democracy and corrode their trust and confidence in the American dream.
To exclude any American is to oppress them; exclusion is oppression, whether by neglect or intent. When there is no equality between votes and money democracy is corrupted. “For our democracy to survive and thrive, we need to bring more people, particularly low- and moderate-income people, into the democratic process.”(Raby, 1992) By allowing for only $1 contributions to each political campaign all Americans can become equally invested, included and engaged in our political system and at the same time end this corrupting, corrosive and exclusionary oppression.
1. To introduce and help support this goal I developed a fundraising web site called $1 Democracy on ActBlue for John Edwards and other candidates who also support campaign finance reform and believe that large contributions are corrupting the political process. On the Web site I will be asking for $1 contributions from everyone, but I will not accept more than a $1 contribution from anyone.
A. The focus of the fundraiser is that a $1 contribution from each of us is all that is necessary to fund a responsible political campaign, and more than what’s necessary corrupts and excludes.
2. Why am I asking for only $1? Dillman (1999) reveals that in survey studies where participants were paid only $1, compared to others who were paid $10 and $25, had a much higher completion rate.
A. The higher paid participants would quit after they felt they had done $10 or $25 dollars worth of work, expressing a financial contract between themselves and those paying for the survey. Whereas, those paid only $1 felt no financial contract, but rather a stronger more personal social contract with those paying for the surveys. The participants felt they gave their word, which for most people is stronger or worth more than $10 or $25 or just money in general, this is what motivated them to finish the survey.
B. The accepted $1 was only a symbol of their personal commitment, their word, not a financial contract, leading them to become more personally invested in the project. This is one of the reasons why I want all of us to give $1 and no more than $1, why we should all begin asking others to give or take no more than $1 in any political campaign. We all must work towards a more personal less financial commitment between political candidates and contributors.
3. To help this fundraising project get off the ground I will need to find and target likely supporters. According to Zandl (1992), targeting likely supporters is important in developing any organization or offering a novel product.
A. For this reason I am going to run my fundraising campaign on the internet where past fundraising campaigns have been successful. Past fundraising activities have highlighted and brought in many new political contributors who are looking for both campaign and political reform.
B. I believe my campaign finance reform message will appeal to these voters/contributors, give them a plan of action they can participate in right now and a concrete, specific campaign finance reform objective to work towards in the future.
4. Let’s now look at how unequal campaign contributions are. According to Weiss (2002), less than 0.1% of the U.S. population gave 83% of all itemized campaign contributions for the 2002 elections. During the 2000 presidential election cycle just over 600,000 people 0.37% of the population gave itemized contributions, indicating contributions of $200 or more. Of the $872 million raised in that election year $728 million came from those giving $1,000 or more.
A. This shows that the vast majority of Americans are excluded from any meaningful financial investment in our current political system.
B. To exclude any American is to oppress them; exclusion is oppression, whether by neglect or intent and is a form of political discrimination.
CONCLUSION
The plan of action is for all Americans interested in campaign finance reform to contribute $1, and no more than $1, to the John Edwards for President Campaign to support his fight against powerful financial interests that are corrupting American politics. If you support another candidate I encourage you to contribute $1 to that candidate, but no more than $1, and express to this candidate that you believe $1 from any American is all that is necessary and more than what’s necessary corrupts and excludes. I want all Americans to join together in the belief that when we contribute $1 to our candidate of choice we create a stronger more personal social contract with that candidate than when we contribute more than $1, which leads to a weaker less personal financial contract. In addition, I want each of us to contribute $1 so we feel equally invested, engaged and included in the political process; it is this connection that provides the energy necessary to achieve social and political change. The US census Bureau (2004) shows the majority of people who register to vote actually vote, showing that once people get themselves included in the political process they will consistently participate within it.
So what’s the best thing about contributing $1 to the John Edwards for President Campaign? You get change back from your dollar.
Please contribute $1 to the candidate(s) of your choice.
Please leave a tip for ActBlue so they can continue their fundraising work.
Less money more votes is the answer to campaign finance reform.
References
Weiss, S. (2002, December). Big-time donors small in number. (Online), 11/23/07. www.opensecrets.org
(2004). Reported rates of voting and registration: 1996 to 2004. (Online), 11/23/07. www.uscensusbureau.gov
Dillman, D. (1999, December). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. New York: Wiley
Zandl, I. (1992). Targeting the trendsetting consumer: How to market your product or service to influential buyers. Homewood, ILL: Business One Irwin
Raby, A. (1992). Bringing voting to the people. In K.M. Arrington, & W.L. Taylor (Eds.), Voting rights in america (pp. 195-204). Washington, D.C.: Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies