The responsibility of every politician is to serve the people, not to stroke their own ego. As I watch the elections of every level of government, I see less of the former and more of the latter. Of course, COMMON SENSE requires us to review the credentials of each and every candidate for each and every position in public office. COMMON SENSE also reminds us that one who runs for public office must have confidence in their abilities and, therefore, must have their ego stroked in order to maintain that faith in their self. However, must their ego be stroked at the rate of approximately One Billion Dollars in each presidential election cycle?!? I am still learning about the fashions and customs of the modern world but I can tell you that this is a poor use of our extensive, but still limited, resources.
I understand the feeling that one must raise money in order to run an effective campaign operation in the current campaign system, but COMMON SENSE argues that raising $100 million for a failed campaign is a poor investment, even if the candidate was in contention until the very last moment. What adds insult to idiocy is that this enormous sum of money is loosely thrown around each election cycle while pervasive societal issues such (poverty, education, etc.) continue. These issues need to be consistently addressed, and not just as talking points, by the candidates. Because the American people need to know that these politicians can effectively combat these societal issues, COMMON SENSE would therefore argue that the campaign cycle should be a challenge to tackle one of these issues. Here is my proposal:
POLICY #1: POLITICAL NON-PROFIT CAMPAIGN
Issue Addressed: Campaign Financing Reform meets Funding for Social Programs
Political Spectrum: All
- Candidates will establish and operate a non-profit organization addressing one societal issue that pervades within the American community
- Donors do not donate to the candidate but rather to the candidate’s organization
- The candidate will use free media outlets to provide platform policies of their potential administrations
- Candidates will be required to be involved in 5 debates to be controlled and run by third parties.
- After election, failed candidates required to stabilize non-profit and run it effectively until qualified replacement is found.
It is COMMON SENSE that, between the two phrases, “well done” is better than “well said”; therefore, the Election Cycle should be chance for candidates to prove their worth as potential future leaders of the “Free World”. No longer, will the American people have to be inundated with multiple messages, speeches, and positive/negative advertisements. A qualified speech-writer can make any Poor Dick appear like a Demi-God. However, if a candidate is placed at the head of an non-profit organization, we, the people, will immediately witness the level of their effectiveness. There are many benefits to this system.
As previously mentioned, the people get to act as scouts, monitoring the movements of each and every candidate. We take the candidates on a “test-run” and determine the strengths and deficiencies of each of them. We take every move into account: what their issue priority is; whom the candidates select in each position within the organization; how effectively the organization becomes (etc.). The Executive Branch of the government is a massive organization that requires the oversight of dozens of departments in the bureaucracy. The pressure of heading our ship of state is immense. I would argue that a candidate who can handle the immense pressure of creating and running an organization dedicated to effectively educate low-income populations while, in the meantime, competing against other candidates in the spotlight of the critical media, is worthy of a potential nomination, if not vote.
There is no more noble cause than effectively tackling poverty or funding a series of schools. Therefore, we can forgive many politicians for their flaws in character if they are effective. Of course, the more egregious characteristic impediments will not be able to be ignored, but if the people are prevented from questioning a woman on her family values because she has chosen to be successful at her work than have a family. If she can help feed children, than who cares if she has them, herself?! I certainly do not!
Furthermore, the donors, themselves, can feel proud of their contributions to normally underfunded organizations. Even if their candidate loses the election, they can feel proud that they raised money to fight one of the many major problems that plague our society. Imagine if Bernie Sanders and his supporters had spent his campaign money – approximately $228 million – on developing a program to reduce college debt. Imagine if Jeb Bush had used his $155 million to aid and support army veterans returning home from war in the Middle East. Imagine if Donald Trump had used his $95 million into a program for early education programs for children…. well maybe not that last one. But you get the idea. If any of those candidates lose, then America still wins. Besides, once someone has donated to an organization, they are more likely to continue providing funds. (Disclaimer: this is a statement which I did no research on and is based off a basic assumption. #politicking)
There will still be an opportunity for the candidates to express their opinions, of course, but their money will not be involved. Third party news outlets will run the televised debates with effective moderators who will make the candidates answer difficult questions. Online sites can run their advertisements. In other words, their messages will be loud, but their actions will be louder.
In order to make show the effectiveness of this policy initiative, I will model my own campaign as a non-profit organization. The “Franklin For President” campaign is dedicated to raising awareness to Common Sense as well as raising money for schools in Philadelphia. The profits of every T-Shirt sold by “Enlightning Tees” will be divided and donated to raise money for both students and teachers. This movement is much more important than the campaign itself. All of my writings and all of my projects will be dedicated to battling urban education. So if you donate to me, you are supporting education! No other candidate can claim that!