I want to talk about something today that is absolutely fundamental to the future of American democracy.
MONEY.
Not your money. Not my money.
The billions of dollars flowing through our political system to influence who gets elected, who gets heard, and ultimately, who gets represented.
And I’ve got a question.
When the hell did running for public office become a fundraising competition?
Seriously!
We’re supposed to be electing people to represent us.
Instead, we’ve created a system where politicians spend an enormous amount of time begging wealthy people for money.
And then we’re surprised when those wealthy people expect something in return!
What did we think was going to happen?
You give somebody a million dollars to help them get elected, and afterward you say, “Hey, Senator, remember me?”
And the senator says, “Of course I remember you! You’re the reason I can afford to be a senator!”
Meanwhile, some poor bastard who donated twenty-five bucks can’t even get his congressman’s office to return a phone call.
Now, let me tell you what got me thinking about this.
There’s a Senate race going on in Michigan.
Two Democrats, Haley Stevens and Abdul El-Sayed, went through a bitter primary.
El-Sayed won.
And one of the major issues dividing them was American policy toward Israel.
According to reporting, AIPAC, an American organization that advocates for a strong U.S.–Israel relationship, spent at least thirty million dollars opposing El-Sayed during the primary.
THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS!
Think about that.
Thirty million dollars spent trying to influence the outcome of one political primary.
Now, AIPAC is an American organization. It’s not the Israeli government, and foreign governments are legally prohibited from contributing to American campaigns.
But that doesn’t eliminate the larger question.
Why should any organization, representing any special interest, be able to spend that kind of money trying to determine who represents the American people?
And this isn’t just about Israel.
It’s about corporations.
It’s about billionaires.
It’s about pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, labor organizations, ideological groups, and anybody else with enough money to influence an election.
I don’t care whether they’re Republicans, Democrats, conservatives, liberals, or the National Association of Left-Handed Pickleball Players.
The question is the same: Why should money buy a louder political voice?
Now, I understand something.
Campaigns cost money.
You’ve got to communicate with voters.
You’ve got to travel.
You’ve got to advertise.
You’ve got to organize.
I’m running for mayor of Greensboro, North Carolina, in 2028.
Believe me, I understand the need for campaign resources.
But here’s what I don’t understand.
Why should the person with the most money have such an enormous advantage over somebody who might have better ideas?
Think about the people who never run for office.
Teachers.
Nurses.
Electricians.
Small-business owners.
People who understand the problems facing their communities because they actually live with those problems every day.
How many potentially outstanding public servants never even consider running because they don’t have wealthy friends or access to political fundraising networks?
And how many people who do run spend more time raising money than listening to the people they’re supposed to represent?
That’s the part that bothers me.
We’ve created a political system where fundraising can become more important than governing.
And I want to change it.
Here’s my proposal.
Publicly financed elections.
Every qualified candidate gets access to the same public campaign budget.
No private campaign contributions.
No PAC money flowing into candidate campaigns.
No wealthy donors writing enormous checks.
And no candidate having to spend half their life dialing for dollars.
Now, before somebody starts screaming about the Constitution, I understand.
The Supreme Court has ruled that independent political spending is protected by the First Amendment.
Citizens United is part of the legal framework we’re dealing with.
So we can’t simply pass a law tomorrow outlawing every form of political spending.
A complete transformation of campaign finance would require major constitutional and legal changes.
Fine. Then let’s have that conversation!
The Constitution has been amended twenty-seven times.
It’s not a museum exhibit.
It’s the governing document of a living democracy.
And if Americans decide that our campaign-finance system needs fundamental reform, constitutional change is one of the mechanisms available to us.
Now, here’s something else.
Under a publicly funded system, taxpayers would help finance candidates they disagree with.
Republicans would help finance Democrats.
Democrats would help finance Republicans.
And everybody would help finance that one guy who thinks the government is secretly controlled by pigeons.
But you know what?
That’s democracy!
Democracy doesn’t mean everybody agrees.
It means everybody gets an opportunity to participate.
Of course, we’d have to establish reasonable qualifications for public funding.
We’d need independent oversight, financial transparency, and safeguards against fraud.
We’d also have to decide how to handle independent political speech without violating constitutional rights.
Those are serious questions.
But they’re questions worth answering.
Because here’s what I keep coming back to.
Who is our government supposed to work for?
The people who finance political campaigns?
Or the people who cast the ballots?
I’ve spent the last several months walking around Greensboro talking to people.
Young people.
Old people.
Black people.
White people.
Rich people.
Poor people.
People with completely different political beliefs.
And I’ve discovered something.
When you sit down with somebody and actually listen, you begin to understand what matters to them.
They’re worried about their families.
Their jobs.
Their healthcare.
Their children’s education.
Their ability to afford a home.
They’re not sitting around discussing which super PAC is going to spend another ten million dollars attacking somebody.
They’re trying to live their lives.
And they want a government that listens.
That’s what this is really about.
Representation.
Not access purchased through campaign contributions.
Not influence measured by the size of somebody’s bank account.
Representation.
Now, I’m not suggesting that public financing would magically eliminate dishonesty, corruption, or political favoritism.
Human beings are human beings.
Somebody will always try to game the system.
Hell, somebody would probably start a super PAC to protect the pigeons!
But we can design a system that reduces the financial incentives that distort political representation.
We can make elections more accessible to ordinary citizens.
And we can make politicians spend more time earning votes and less time chasing checks.
That’s the kind of reform I want Americans to seriously consider.
Because I believe the strength of a democracy should be measured by the participation of its citizens, not the size of its political fundraising accounts.
And that brings me back to the Truth Party.
I’ve been saying this from the beginning.
We need to turn spectators into citizens.
We need people to get involved.
To ask questions.
To challenge assumptions.
To demand accountability.
And to recognize that democracy belongs to all of us.
Not just the wealthy.
Not just the powerful.
Not just the politically connected.
ALL OF US.
So here’s my message.
Let’s have a national conversation about publicly financed elections.
Let’s examine the constitutional changes that would be required.
Let’s debate the details.
And let’s ask ourselves whether the system we have today is really the system we want to leave to our children and grandchildren.
Because the goal isn’t to silence political speech.
The goal is to make sure ordinary Americans have a meaningful voice in their own government.
Take the money out of politics.
Put the citizens back into it.
And remember:
BUT FIRST, WE SHOW UP!
Join the Conversation