Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Three pillars of conservative thought demand a constitutional curb on campaign finance

Three pillars of conservative thought demand a constitutional curb on campaign finance

"Our government must be solely accountable to the governed — we, the American people," argues Jim Rubens.

mj0007/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Rubens was a Republican state senator in New Hampshire from 1994 to 1998. He's a board member of American Promise, which seeks to amend the Constitution to allow tighter controls on money in politics.

This month I shared the stage at American Promise's citizen leadership conference with Rep. Jamie Raskin, a liberal Democrat from Maryland. We differ on policy, but the two of us join most every American in agreeing on this deepest fundamental: Our government must be solely accountable to the governed — we, the American people.

To this end, to protect and preserve the world's oldest democratic republic, we will break the suffocating grip of concentrated big-money. We will get a 28th Amendment added to our cherished and ever-more-perfect Constitution.

Democrats are overwhelmingly on board. Two-thirds of Republican voters are on board. Now is the time to get Republicans in Congress to join us in large numbers. To do so we must persuade their most conservative constituents. And we can do that because big-money corruption is undermining three critical conservative priorities: capitalism, low taxes and federalism.


Our Founders unleashed capitalism — specifically, free-market capitalism — giving us greater wealth, progress and well-being worldwide than in all human history. But the current system of legalized political corruption has mutated free-market capitalism into crony capitalism.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Under crony capitalism, government picks economic winners and losers by doling out tax breaks, loan guarantees, regulatory favors and contract awards. Instead of delivering better products and services to customers, business competes by buying influence or submitting to de facto extortion in Washington.

The result? Innovation and new business formation have dropped to historic lows. Financial engineering is in. Capital investment and long-term research and development are out. Crony capitalism is why we have broadband and cellular dead zones, the world's highest drug prices, ethanol subsidies, too-big-to-fail banks and multibillion-dollar weapons systems that don't work.

It's why young and non-white voters — who will be the majority in a generation — now favor socialism over capitalism. The pay-to-play influence economy — not the Squad, not MSNBC — is the single most direct threat to free-market capitalism.

Now, conservatives come in several flavors, from small-l libertarians and social conservatives to right-populists and internationalists. We fight internally over abortion, trade, immigration and war. But one pillar of conservative thought connects all of us: keeping taxes low. And sustainably low taxes come from sustainably low spending.

Conservatives and progressives have both learned the hard way that big money does not really care about right-versus-left philosophy. Big money is united behind an endless push for more spending and tax loopholes for their favored programs.

And big money is driving big spending in a big way — because crony capitalism is so much more profitable than slugging it out in a competitive marketplace. A study by Open The Books published in Forbes magazine found that, for each dollar spent lobbying, the top 10 spenders got $1,000 in taxpayer-funded grants and contracts. A Sunlight Foundation study found something similar: For each dollar spent on lobbying and political contributions, politically active corporations received $760 in tax breaks, loan guarantees and contracts.

Pay-to-play corruption is why we're entering a time of trillion-dollar-a-year deficits. It's why Washington has recklessly loaded crushing debt service onto the backs of young people. It's why we've fattened special interests and starved spending on the infrastructure and blue-sky research that power long-term prosperity.

In the end, the bill will come due in the form of whopping tax increases. We can draw a straight line from the corrupt, big-money system to short-termism, twisted monetary policy, unsustainable spending commitments and punishing future tax increases.

To tackle this, conservatives want to amend the Constitution to mandate a balanced federal budget amendment; 28 of the necessary 38 states are on board for ratification. Conservatives need more blue states to get there. And we need red states at American Promise, where we count 20 states on board for amending the Constitution to allow more campaign finance regulation.

Our shared goals, ending high-tax fiscal insanity and big-money corruption, are joined at the hip. You can envision a beautiful red-blue reformers marriage.

In the past three years I've met with conservative state legislators from several states advocating support for a 28th Amendment. They are really angry at Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg, big unions and even fellow conservative Sheldon Adelson for pouring billions in from far away to buy elections. In swing presidential states, tight congressional races and even state legislative contests, a handful of billionaires from San Francisco, Manhattan and (probable) Saudi Arabia are tipping the scales.

When I ran for the Senate three years ago, total spending on the contest was $132 million — 95 percent of it from out of state. This is absolutely not what the Founders intended.

Because the hollowed-out media concentrate coverage on the candidates with the big money, the home-grown and locally funded candidates stay invisible. Voters are overwhelmed with a blizzard of ads paid for with "dark money" and filled with unrebutted lies. Debate is narrowed, voters get even more cynical and the issues get nationalized.

A conservative favorite from our Bill of Rights, the 10th Amendment reserves to the states and people all powers not expressly granted by the Constitution to the federal government. It guarantees respect for local preferences and political space to test and replicate successful policies. It makes the states our laboratories of democracy, and gives our form of government a unique structural advantage among nations. The corrupt, big-money system poses a direct threat to federalism, one of our strongest protections against the sort of tyranny that's spawned in the dark swamps of concentrated power.

In the end, conservatives in great numbers will join our movement because the pay-to-play, big-money system is killing free-market capitalism, exploding spending and debt and concentrating power in Washington. So those who want a 28th Amendment should have absolute confidence that Republicans have principled and powerful motivations to get aboard.

Read More

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

Someone filling out a ballot.

Getty Images / Hill Street Studios

Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

In the 2024 U.S. election, several states did not pass ballot initiatives to implement Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) despite strong majority support from voters under 65. Still, RCV was defended in Alaska, passed by a landslide in Washington, D.C., and has earned majority support in 31 straight pro-RCV city ballot measures. Still, some critics of RCV argue that it does not enhance and promote democratic principles as much as forms of proportional representation (PR), as commonly used throughout Europe and Latin America.

However, in the U.S. many people have not heard of PR. The question under consideration is whether implementing RCV serves as a stepping stone to PR by building public understanding and support for reforms that move away from winner-take-all systems. Utilizing a nationally representative sample of respondents (N=1000) on the 2022 Cooperative Election Survey (CES), results show that individuals who favor RCV often also know about and back PR. When comparing other types of electoral reforms, RCV uniquely transfers into support for PR, in ways that support for nonpartisan redistricting and the national popular vote do not. These findings can inspire efforts that demonstrate how RCV may facilitate the adoption of PR in the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less