Take The Money And Run... For Congress

One of my favorite routines on Saturdays is to drive-- and it takes almost an hour-- to the health-conscious Ethiopian vegan restaurant on Fairfax, Rahel, where they serve a scrumptious all-you-can-eat buffet for around $10.00. And on the way I listen to Ira Glass' weekly show on Public Radio International, This American Life. This week, Glass covered the way a decidedly pro-corporate, right-wing Supreme Court has given Big Business permission to buy out American democracy. Above is a sliver sent out by Democratic candidate from northern California, Dr. Ami Bera, to his supporters. It barely scratches the surface and below is the entire one hour program. If, for no other reason, you can listen to it, you'll hear John McCain calling the Republican Supreme Court justices "naive" and "arrogant," particularly Scalia. He doesn't use "corrupt" in his description of them but a casual listener can't miss the point.

More and more concerned progressives are starting to realize that until Citizens United is overturned, democracy will be held captive by a few families of billionaires and by corporations with their own agendas. Raul Grijalva and Keith Ellison addressed it head on in the Progressive Caucus' Budget For All, which was badly defeated in the House last week, only 78 intrepid liberals willing to vote for it. More Democrats were looking for something more corporate-friendly, just not as corporate friendly as the totally toxic Ryan Budget. Here's how the Budget For All deals with derailing Citizens United.

Public financing of elections
 
The Budget for All is dedicated to leveling the playing field and reducing the influence of money in politics and campaigns. It would invest in the public financing of elections by dedicating $10.9 billion toward the Fair Elections Now Act (S. 752 and H.R. 1826).31 Introduced in 2009 by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), and Reps. John Larson (D-Conn.) and Walter Jones, Jr. (R-N.C.), the Act would allow federal candidates to choose to run for office without relying on large contributions, money bundlers, or donations from lobbyists. Additionally, the Fair Elections Now Act would free politicians from constant fundraising obligations, allowing them to focus more time on constituents and policymaking.
 
Participating candidates would raise a large number of small contributions from their local communities (capped at $100 per person per year) in order to qualify for Fair Elections funding (Fair Elections Now 2012). After meeting the small contributions qualifications, candidates would receive Fair Elections funding in the primary and the general election. For House races, candidates would receive $900,000, split 40 percent for the primary and 60 percent for the general election. For Senate races, candidates would receive $1.25 million, plus $250,000 per congressional district in their state. The primary-general election funding split would be the same as for House races. Qualified candidates could also receive additional matching Fair Elections funds if they continued to raise small donations from their constituents. Donations of $100 or less would be matched by $5 from the Fair Elections fund for every $1 raised, limited to three times the initial allocation of money for the primary, and again for the general election. Additionally, Fair Elections would help to offset the excessive cost of purchasing media coverage. Participating candidates would receive a 20 percent reduction from the lowest broadcast rates, could receive media vouchers, and would have the opportunity to exchange those vouchers for cash with their national political party committee.