Paying for Congress

Citizens pay for the operation of Congress as well as the election and compensation of members of Congress. As a result, citizens expect a responsive national legislature. This expectation might be fully realized were it not for the one congressional expense that citizens do not fund: cam paigns. Wealthy individuals, political action committees (PACs), corporate and union supporters of political p~l1ties, and the candidates themselves pay for most campaign expendi tures, and candidates are naturally inclined to spend money on and act in the interests of their tlnanciers. Those interests often converge on one objective: winning. Regrettably, the candidates' desire to win an election does not often produce what voters want-the motivation to go to the polls and the ability to make an informed choice. Citizens cannot expect much from campaigns financed by others. The low expectations that voters have for congressional campaigns can be measured by voter turnout; roughly 60 percent of citizens stay home on a congressional election day.l Research indicates that three factors---clisbelief in gov ernment's responsiveness, disinterest in media coverage of campaigns, and lack of knowledge about candidates and issues-contribute to voters' decisions to ignore election day,2 To the extent that the current system of campaign finance reinforces voter apathy, the system is hopelessly flawed. Many of the flaws in today's system can be corrected with the Voter Information Program (VIP). VIP asks citizens to pay only for the availability of enough information and dia logue to make an informed vote. Unlike traditional public financing schemes, dlis program would not allow candi dates to freely spend taxpayers' funds. Under VIP, federal and state governments would appropriate funds for the