Electoral Politics and Market Failure

This editorial describes a better way to purchase politicians. It reminds us that our electoral system is similar to the market system that determines how products are purchased. Markets are limited to consumers who have the funds to purchase products or services that maximize their utility. Politicians are in the business of providing utility to those who can afford their services. Those who can afford their services are able to extract benefits that far exceed the price on offer. The solution described in this article is an attempt to deal with some aspects of market failure. It simply changes the characteristics of the market.

We have tried numerous ways to limit the role of money in our electoral system. They have not worked. The money always finds a way into the market. After all, what good is money if one can't purchase whatever one wants with it? The problem with campaign finance gets worse each year as the cost of running campaigns escalates. The most straight forward way of dealing with the problem is for government to set limits on the amount that can be spent in total on campaigns. We would need to define the forms of campaign communication that would be accounted for, and set limits depending upon the level of office under contention. This may be impractical if we expect those in office, who are advantaged in raising funds, to make these changes. It would also be opposed by those who benefit from the market. It would require sufficient public interest in preserving Democracy to force the needed changes on our elected officials or by pushing for a constitutional amendment that would have the desired effect. If we do nothing we risk total disinterest among citizens in the electoral system. That only helps those who only like a form of Democracy that serves their interests. They have no real interest in a well functioning democracy that serves the public interest.