Policy Document Series · Issue 24 of 35 · April 2026
Money Out. People In. Every Dollar Traceable. Every Election Publicly Funded.
Money controls American democracy. The 2024 elections cost $15.9 billion — the most expensive in history. Just 1.05% of Americans gave $200 or more, yet that fraction provided 78.45% of all campaign contributions. Princeton researchers found average citizens have "near-zero" influence on policy while economic elites dominate. The corruption tax runs $9,000–$16,200 per household per year. This platform ends it.
Contents
American democracy has a price tag — and most Americans can't afford it. The 2024 elections cost $15.9 billion. Just 1.05% of Americans gave $200 or more, yet that sliver of the population provided 78.45% of all campaign contributions. Princeton researchers Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page documented the result: economic elites have a "substantial independent impact" on U.S. government policy, while average citizens have "near-zero" measurable influence.
The Common Good Party's position is clear: this is not a side issue. It is the issue that determines whether every other issue in this platform is achievable. The corruption tax — the cost every American household pays in inflated drug prices, bloated defense contracts, and foregone regulatory benefits — runs $9,000 to $16,200 per year. That is what regulatory capture and pay-to-play governance cost in concrete terms. Every household. Every year.
Dark money exploded from $127 million in 2010 to $1.9 billion in 2024. A single donor gave $1.6 billion to a 501(c)(4) — the largest known political donation in American history — with no required disclosure. Lobbying hit a record $4.44 billion, generating an estimated $220 return for every dollar spent. The Federal Election Commission deadlocks on approaching 40% of cases by design.
This platform consolidates and extends the campaign finance provisions of Issues 18 and 20 with comprehensive enforcement infrastructure through seven pillars plus an Anti-Corruption Fund: the Sunlight Act, Democracy Funding Act, replacement of the FEC with a Federal Election Integrity Commission, an End Revolving Door Act, a Congressional Ethics Act, an Anti-Capture Act, and FARA Reform. Every dollar traceable. Every election publicly funded. Money out. People in.
The corruption of American democracy operates through four interlocking systems: the dominance of big money in elections, the explosion of dark money with no accountability, the direct corruption tax paid by ordinary households, and an enforcement agency structurally designed not to enforce.
The revolving door completes the circuit: 866 former members of Congress were registered as lobbyists as of 2025. The average salary increase upon moving from congressional staff to lobbying is 1,452%. A 2022 economic study found that 49% of financial regulators adjusted their enforcement decisions to benefit future private-sector employers. The Supreme Court has no binding ethics code despite documented receipt of $4.2 million in gifts to a single justice. The STOCK Act imposes a $200 penalty for late disclosure — less than the cost of a parking ticket in most cities.
The current campaign finance regime was not the result of democratic failure — it was the result of judicial construction and deliberate legislative design. A series of Supreme Court decisions built an architecture that treats billion-dollar political expenditures as constitutionally protected speech, while Congress built an enforcement agency with structural deadlock baked in.
1976
Buckley v. Valeo — Money Becomes Speech
The Supreme Court equated money with speech, establishing the constitutional framework that has resisted reform for five decades. Buckley upheld contribution limits but struck down expenditure limits — drawing a line that subsequent courts would systematically erase. The premise that a billion-dollar political expenditure is constitutionally equivalent to a street corner speech has never been put to voters. It was imposed by five justices.
2010
Citizens United & SpeechNow — The Floodgates Open
Citizens United v. FEC unleashed unlimited corporate and union spending in elections, ruling that independent expenditures cannot be limited regardless of their source. In the same year, SpeechNow.org v. FEC created Super PACs — entities that can raise and spend unlimited amounts as long as they don't "coordinate" with campaigns, a restriction that in practice has proven unenforceable. Dark money immediately began its exponential growth from $127 million to $1.9 billion in fourteen years.
2014
McCutcheon v. FEC — Aggregate Limits Fall
McCutcheon removed aggregate contribution limits — the total amount any individual could give across all candidates and party committees. Each decision built upon the last, constructing a legal architecture that systematically eliminated every mechanism Congress had enacted to limit the role of concentrated wealth in elections. By 2014, the judicial reconstruction of American campaign finance was effectively complete.
By design
The FEC's Structural Deadlock — Not a Bug
Congress designed the FEC to deadlock. The six-member commission with equal partisan representation and a four-vote threshold was not an accident — it was a deliberate choice by legislators who preferred no enforcement to vigorous enforcement. The dark money architecture completed the picture: 501(c)(4)s are not required to disclose donors, the IRS has treated "primary purpose" as a standard nearly any political operation can satisfy, and crypto donations add a third dimension of obfuscation with no adequate regulatory framework.
Every nation that ranks above the United States on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index has robust public financing and disclosure requirements. The relationship is not coincidental. And two American cities have already proven that the model works at scale.
| Country / Model | CPI Score | Key Mechanism | Notable Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 87/100 | Public party financing, strict contribution limits | Consistently #1 least corrupt country globally on Transparency International rankings |
| Sweden | 81/100 | Public financing, short campaign seasons | No corporate donations to political parties allowed; campaign duration strictly regulated |
| United Kingdom | — | Strict spending limits: ~£30,000 per constituency; short regulated campaign period | Races decided for tens of thousands of pounds versus millions in equivalent U.S. districts. Campaign period legally limited. |
| France | — | Presidential cap €22.5M; 47.5% state reimbursement; TV ad ban; equal TV time for all candidates | Public financing + equal media access + spending caps. No paid political TV advertising during campaigns. |
| Canada | — | Individual donation cap of C$1,725; corporate and union donations banned since 2004 | No corporate money in politics at all. Per-vote public subsidy (eliminated 2015 but replaced by tax credit system). |
| Germany | — | Public financing proportional to votes received + membership dues; disclosure required above €10,000 | Parties funded primarily through public grants and member contributions, not large donors. |
| Japan | — | Public financing since 1994; individual donation cap ¥1.5M (~$10,000); corporate donations restricted | Public subsidy system allocates ~$250M/year to parties based on seats and vote share. |
| New York City (U.S. model) | — | 8:1 small-dollar matching for contributions under $250 | Women on city council: 27% → 61%. Donor pool broadened dramatically to include non-wealthy New Yorkers. |
| Seattle (U.S. model) | — | Democracy Vouchers ($13/property/year) | 48,071 participants; Black political participation doubled; cost: $13 per property per year |
The key lesson: public financing amplifies speech, it does not suppress it. NYC's 8:1 matching program did not produce a homogeneous council — it produced a more diverse one. Seattle's Democracy Vouchers did not reduce participation — they doubled Black participation and expanded the donor base from a wealthy sliver to tens of thousands of ordinary residents. Nations with strong public financing consistently rank at the top of global anti-corruption indices. The evidence is not ambiguous.
The Common Good Party's campaign finance platform attacks corruption at every layer — disclosure, public funding, enforcement, revolving door, congressional ethics, regulatory capture, and foreign influence. Each pillar is specific and enforceable. Together, they constitute a complete overhaul.
87% of Americans support campaign finance disclosure requirements across party lines. The only people who benefit from anonymity are those whose spending would not survive scrutiny. This pillar closes every known avenue for secret political money.
The NYC and Seattle models prove that public financing works — and that it changes who runs, who wins, and who gets represented. The federal version scales these proven mechanisms nationally at a cost of roughly $3.50 per taxpayer per year.
NYC's matching program transformed the city council from 27% to 61% women. Seattle's Democracy Vouchers doubled Black political participation and enrolled 48,071 participants at $13 per property per year. This is the investment required to make every voter a meaningful political donor, not just the 1.05% who currently drive 78.45% of all contributions.
You cannot fix the FEC. You abolish it. The structural deadlock is not a malfunction — it is a feature deliberately designed by legislators who prefer impunity. The solution is replacement.
Full Mandatory Duty to Act Standard: 30-day investigation trigger upon credible complaint; inaction defaults to action at 30 days; 180-day disposition deadline; no-deadlock rule (majority vote sufficient); mandamus jurisdiction for courts to compel FEIC action; individual commissioner accountability for willful inaction; annual public report on all complaints and dispositions.
866 former members of Congress were registered as lobbyists as of 2025. The average salary increase from congressional staff to lobbying is 1,452%. 49% of financial regulators adjusted enforcement decisions to benefit future private employers. The revolving door is not how you get expertise into government — it is how you get capture.
The current STOCK Act penalty for late disclosure is $200. Clarence Thomas received $4.2 million in undisclosed gifts. Members of Congress trade on inside information with no meaningful consequence. The Supreme Court has no binding ethics code. This pillar installs one for Congress and extends it to the Court.
Regulatory capture is the mechanism through which the corruption tax is collected. The Boeing model — where the FAA allowed Boeing to certify its own aircraft safety — produced two crashes and 346 deaths. This pillar ends industry self-certification and installs structural independence across the regulatory system.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act exists to ensure Americans know when foreign governments are attempting to influence U.S. policy. The GAO has documented that DOJ rarely prosecutes FARA violations despite widespread noncompliance. The LDA loophole — which allows most foreign-funded lobbyists to register under the weaker Lobbying Disclosure Act — guts the law's core purpose.
The Anti-Corruption Fund — The Self-Reinforcing Engine
All fines, penalties, and treble damages collected under the Sunlight Act, Democracy Funding Act, FEIC, Congressional Ethics Act, Anti-Capture Act, and FARA Reform flow into a dedicated Anti-Corruption Fund. This fund is self-reinforcing: the more violations are caught and penalized, the more resources are available to fund enforcement. The system pays for itself through the penalties it collects.
A vigorous enforcement regime generates increasing resources to fund the democracy infrastructure that reduces the need for enforcement over time. This is not a cost center — it is a revenue engine aligned with the public interest.
The total new spending cost of this platform is approximately $3.50 per taxpayer per year — compared to the $9,000–$16,200 annual corruption tax Americans currently pay. Most elements require budget reallocation, not new appropriations. The Anti-Corruption Fund creates a self-reinforcing enforcement mechanism that generates its own revenue through penalties.
The sequencing prioritizes immediate executive action on revolving door and FARA enforcement, followed by the legislative foundation for disclosure and public financing, then the structural reforms to the FEC and ethics infrastructure, and finally the long-game constitutional amendment.
Phase 1 — Executive Action
Months 1–6
Phase 2 — Foundation
Months 6–18
Phase 3 — Ethics & FARA
Years 2–3
Phase 4 — Amendment Campaign
Years 3–5
Phase 5 — Full Reform
Year 5+
The arguments against campaign finance reform are funded by the people who benefit from the current system. Here is what the evidence actually shows.
"This restricts free speech."
Money is not speech. The First Amendment protects expression, not financial transactions. Disclosure requirements do not restrict what anyone can say — they ensure voters know who is saying it. Public financing does not suppress speech — it amplifies it by giving millions of small donors the same platform access that billionaires currently buy. 87% of Americans support campaign finance disclosure requirements across party lines. The argument that transparency "restricts speech" is made almost exclusively by those whose spending would not survive public scrutiny. That is not a constitutional principle. It is a preference for anonymity.
"Public financing is a waste of taxpayer money."
The corruption tax costs American households $9,000–$16,200 per year in inflated drug prices, bloated defense contracts, and foregone regulatory benefits. Democracy Vouchers cost $13 per property per year in Seattle. Small-dollar matching costs roughly $3.50 per taxpayer annually at the federal level. Defense contractors gave $10.2 million in campaign donations and received $45 billion in extra defense spending — a 449,000% return on investment. The question is not whether public financing is expensive. It is whether the current system is cheaper. The answer is no — by four orders of magnitude. NYC and Seattle prove the model works at scale and produces measurably more representative outcomes.
"You can't fix the FEC."
Correct. You can't fix the FEC — which is why this platform abolishes it. The FEC's dysfunction is not a malfunction. It is a feature deliberately designed by legislators who preferred no enforcement to vigorous enforcement. A 5-member Federal Election Integrity Commission with no more than two members from any party, appointed through an independent judicial process, operating under a mandatory Duty to Act standard, eliminates structural deadlock by design rather than working around it. The $18 million Bloomberg violation that the FEC dismissed — not because it was legal, but because it could not agree to act — would be investigated and resolved under the FEIC within 180 days. That is the difference between a commission designed to enforce and one designed not to.
"The revolving door is how you get expertise."
Ten years is not forever. Expertise does not require capture. The economic research is unambiguous: a 2022 study found that 49% of financial regulators adjusted their enforcement decisions to benefit future private-sector employers. That is not expertise informing government — that is a structural conflict of interest corrupting enforcement. Anti-capture provisions that prevent industry executives from immediately leading the agencies that regulate their industry do not prevent expertise from entering government. They prevent the most conflicted appointments from happening. There is no shortage of financial experts who have not spent the last decade working for the institutions they would regulate.
"Dark money is protected speech."
Political spending is a public act directed at influencing government — not private association. NAACP v. Alabama (1958), which protected membership lists from compelled government disclosure, involved private associational records. Political spending directed at elections is categorically different: it is an attempt to influence public governance. The Constitution permits — and democracy requires — knowing who is attempting to buy it. A $1.6 billion donation to a political nonprofit routed through a 501(c)(4) is not a private act of association. It is the largest known attempt to purchase political influence in American history. It should be disclosed.
The following statistics underpin the policy positions in this document. Each is sourced from nonpartisan research organizations, government data, or established investigative reporting.
Campaign finance and political corruption intersect with every policy domain in this platform — because the corruption of the legislative process is what prevents every other reform from being enacted. The following cross-references identify the most direct policy connections.
| #2 | Taxation | Dark money tax loopholes through 501(c)(4)s; donor benefit transparency; charitable deduction abuse by politically active nonprofits; wealth tax reduces the concentration that fuels mega-donations. |
| #9 | Defense Spending | Pentagon audit requirements; defense contractor lobbying restrictions; the revolving door between DOD and defense industry is among the most documented and costly instances of regulatory capture. |
| #18 | Voting Rights | Citizens United constitutional amendment; public campaign funding; ban on PAC spending in federal elections; ranked-choice voting — this pillar and Issue 18 are the twin pillars of democratic integrity. |
| #20 | Corporate Power & Antitrust | Congressional stock trading ban; criminal lobbying penalties; CINA investment restrictions; anti-capture provisions that prevent corporate executives from immediately running the agencies that regulate them. |
| #21 | Internet, Privacy & Big Tech | Cryptocurrency political donation regulation; political ad transparency requirements; AI-generated deepfake disclosure in political advertising; platform accountability for dark money ads. |
| #22 | Racial Justice | Voter suppression enforcement; corporate racial accountability; dark money operations that have disproportionately targeted minority communities with disinformation; Democracy Vouchers that doubled Black political participation in Seattle. |
"This is not a side issue. It is the issue that determines whether every other issue in this platform is achievable. Money out. People in. Everything else follows."— The Common Good Party
Sources & Citations