A Donor Based Election System Can Not Be Fair

 

'Democracy Dies in Darkness' say the motto under the Washington Post logo.

But the headline and report below it demonstrate that whatever is sold as 'democracy' in the U.S. is not what people would generally perceive as a democratic system.

bigger

Pence qualifies for GOP presidential debate after hitting donor threshold

If the elections are based on equality, and free and fair, why is there a 'donor threshold' for taking part in an election debate?

Mike Pence has attracted enough donors to qualify for the Republican Party’s first presidential debate in Milwaukee this month, a person familiar with the matter said, ending speculation that the former vice president might not be able to meet the requirement.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) requires candidates to attract 40,000 unique donors, with at least 200 individual donors each from 20 or more states or territories, among several criteria. Pence, who has struggled to gain traction as a presidential candidate, was at risk of not crossing that threshold before the Aug. 23 debate.

But he saw an uptick in donors since the latest indictment against former president Donald Trump last week, according to the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share information that hasn’t been released publicly. The indictment alleges that Trump sought to overturn the 2020 election, partly by pressuring Pence to interfere with the results.

Okay. It is at least not (solely) based the size of donations a candidate might attract, but on the number of donors and a certain geographic dispersion. But I find neither justifiable.

Why are donors required at all? A state financed system based on the number of votes a candidate attracts would be in general more just.

In a preelection process a system where the number of signatures from voters, instead of donations, would count as sufficient, would also be a better solution. The candidates would then have to make real political arguments instead of promising 'lower taxes' or other potential giveaways only to attract money.

The requirement of out of state donations is unfair to candidates who have a large home base in a large state with a big number of electors.

The system the Republican Party uses is also very vulnerable to manipulation:

While front-runners such as Trump and DeSantis appear to have easily qualified for the national debate, less popular candidates have turned to gimmicks to get enough donors.

North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum has offered $20 gift cards to the first 50,000 people who donate $1 to his campaign. And Miami Mayor Francis Suarez offered a chance to enter a raffle to win tickets to soccer star Lionel Messi’s debut with Inter Miami.

Candidates are spending their own or a big donor's money to attract less money. This only to be part of a TV debate.

It does not make any sense.

Democracy can not die in such a system because it is simply not there.

Posted by b on August 8, 2023 at 13:31 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/08/a-donor-based-election-system-can-not-be-fair.html