King for a day

Question
What would you do if you were made head of the country for just long enough to impose one piece of legislation? Would you right a perceived wrong, or attend to your pet cause? Essentially, the question is: what added law would do the country the most good?



My Answer
I would set up a system for the public funding of elections.

I thought for a while about the various other causes I might want to try and devote my 15 minute reign to, but I think this works out best. When you're trying to decide between a number of choices, I'm a big fan of third-way options which use a creative alternative to allow you to have you cake and eat it, too (aside: I used to hate that aphorism, but it's growing on me).

The theory behind my choice: as cynical as I may sound sometimes, I really believe that well-run democracies will eventually come up with the right answers. In our case, however, there is a huge problem created by the process of elections.

In order to be a serious contender, you must have some serious cash backing. In order to get that backing, you must be supported by major corporations. And in order for major corporations to think that you're worth investing in, they must believe that your election will bring them something in return. Obviously, there's a huge incentive there to govern in the interest of your financial patriarchs, rather than in the interest of your constituents.

People have tried to fix this problem through campaign finance reform laws. Unfortunately, there are a few major weaknesses in those laws:
1. It's really hard to plug all the potential loop holes.
2. Without some sort of financing, the super-rich have a huge advantage.
3. There is some concern that it is a violation of free speach to prevent people from giving money to political organizations.

My solution to the problem is publicly-funded elections. Here's how it works: money is accrued through taxes (the cost is an estimated $1 per person). Any candidate getting a requisite minimum number of signatures is eligible to spend this money on an election. If all the candidates in a race opt to run with public money, they are each allowed a fixed ammount. If only one candidate elects to take they public money, enough is given to catch him/her up with his opponent. Since the opponent now has no incentive to try to outspend his/her rival, the total money spent drops significantly.

I like this idea a lot because it frees politicians from their financial obligtions, and allows them to support the legislation based upon whether they think it is sound, rather than whether it will be good for their backers. This would end the patron system we have now, and get real work accomplished on immigration, the environment, education, the economy, and many other areas in which companies havea vested interest.