For all the things I think Andrew Yang was wrong about, I highly agree with his idea about implementing a federal system where every US taxpayer has a credit that they could give to their candidate of choice during the primaries, and again in the general election. We’ll call it somewhere around $50 a person each election. $25 for the primary and $25 for the election. If a candidate wins the primary, any leftover campaign money from that primary credit rolls into their general election fund. If 150 million people who voted in the 2020 election used their credit that allows a very generous cumulative pool of 7.5 billion dollars on the table which is far greater than the total utilized campaign expenditures of any 2 candidates in any election thus far and leaves ample room for independent candidates to emerge with money to compete. Credit applications for candidates would open before the primary cycle but remain open throughout the course of the primary and general election. If you haven’t made up your mind immediately you don’t have to use your credit before making an informed decision. This would push candidates to rely on grassroots campaigning early.
Every US Citizen that is registered to vote could use their credit towards the campaign of a candidate they support. It gives everyone equal weight in the election process regardless of wealth. Besides that, a campaign can be self-funded on the candidate’s personal income but is not allowed donations or assistance of any other kind. Not from billionaires, lobbyists, corporations, foreign emissaries, their rich uncle, or anywhere else. All campaign spending must be closely monitored by the IRS. The campaign should be funded by the taxpayer credit and the candidate but no one else, including their VP pick.
This would give independents and candidates unaffiliated with the 2 party system a fighting chance to run on public choice. It would also pinch out unpopular candidates in the DNC and RNC in favor of the people’s choice. Your chance as a president should not be contingent on how filthy rich you are or the global elites propping you up but instead by the citizens (not denizens) of the Republic. We should not have puppeteers pulling strings and shifting legislation to their will because they have money in the pockets of politicians. I believe this could be expanded to state government as well in the future but that of course would be left up to the states.
The application process would be managed federally and require an application each election year separate from your voter registration. The system should be closely guarded from fraud and would require at least your full legal name as it appears on your driver’s license, DOB, current address, and valid social security number authenticated in order to redeem. Voter identification may not matter to places like California but our money should not be able to be frivolously abused by fraudsters. The application will remain separate from voter registration and require a thorough identification/ authentication process.
As for the coffer, it would be provided by taxpayers, for taxpayers. $50 an election cycle every 4 years comes out to less than $0.20 a week per adult taxpayer on their paystub and would be untaxed. That’s less than $0.80 a month. As a tea party advocate I know that the idea of paying any more to your federal government will make some of us groan but it would literally be your own money you’re using (think of it like a forced saving’s account, or social security) and I think it would compel more people to be involved in the election cycle and allow US citizens to genuinely have an impact on the outcome of the election. It gives all of us a voice. The legislation to implement the credit system would also ban and make illegal PACs, super PACs, Lobbying, and any other form of external campaign contributions in the form of tangible gifts, goods, or money.
Unused credit funds are saved for the next election cycle so that we as taxpayers spend less on the credit system the next time around should some of the money go unused. This means that as some funds go unused, we will (hopefully) pay less and less per election cycle rather than paying the same amount on our paystubs. Analytics would be provided at the end of the election cycle detailing how many participants used the credit, how many did not, which candidates received the credit and in what amount, and what the remaining balance of the credit funds would be.