Incumbent Protection Plan - Clean Elections PA

A majority of Pennsylvania's Members of Congress have indicated support for publicly funded elections.
THE INCUMBENT PROTECTION PROGRAM

A majority of Pennsylvania's Members of Congress have indicated support for publicly funded elections.

THE INCUMBENT PROTECTION PROGRAM


The current system of privately funded election campaigns has produced governments in Harrisburg and Washington that are unresponsive to the needs of the citizens. And it is no wonder. Responding to the needs of the citizens is the last thing an incumbent needs to do in order to get re-elected to office. The first thing, and in many cases the ONLY thing an incumbent has to do to get re-elected, is to gather so much money in campaign contributions that no one back home in their district, in the incumbent's party or any other party, will be able to mount a serious campaign against the incumbent. And so, the incumbent's most important job is to take care of their campaign contributors - their "paying customers". And, in return, these "paying customers" take care of the incumbents by making payments to their re-election campaigns. An incumbent's ability to be re-elected doesn't have much to do with taking care of the "folks back home". In the 2004 election, nearly 98% of incumbent Pennsylvania legislators were re-elected. A similar percentage of Members of Congress were also re-elected. Why? In part, because our system of privately funded elections allows incumbents to collect such large amounts for their re-election campaigns (from lobbyists and other self-interests) that it is almost impossible for other potential candidates to raise enough money to run competitive campaigns against incumbents. In the 2004 election, only 9% of incumbent members of the General Assembly in Harrisburg had challengers in both the primary and general elections. This arrangement, along with the re-districting process, protects incumbents by making it almost impossible for the citizens to vote them out! As a result, many incumbents are free to attend to their own needs and the needs of their private campaign financers, but they feel no urgency to address the needs of the other citizens, the "non-paying customers". Due to the pay raise issue and an extraordinary effort by volunteers across Pennsylvania, an unusual number of incumbent elected officials lost in 2006. Still, 88% of incumbent state legislators who ran, won. In Congress, where a 98% incumbent success rate had been the rule for the past 5 elections, in 2006 the rate was 94%. *When elections are not competitive, incumbents are not accountable to the citizens.* *When incumbents are not accountable to the citizens, our democracy is broken.*
People say they don't like Congress but they like their Representative. Because privately financed elections create such one-sided election campaigns, voters are bombarded at election time with advertising from the incumbent telling them what a terrific job the incumbent has done. Since there is usually no competition able to purchase significant amounts of opposing advertising, voters seldom see or hear anything but positive information about their incumbent. And between elections, incumbents already have their own system of publicly financed re-election campaigns! They mail out those bright, beautiful pamphlets telling the voters what a great job they are doing down in Washington or Harrisburg! Some legislators even produce television programs about what a good job they are doing. These "constituent updates" are a form of publicly financed campaigning. It is publicly financed campaigning, but for incumbents only! Even if you believe that your elected official is completely incorruptible, ask them, "Why not support Clean Elections for the rest of the government?". Elected officials who are doing a good job should have nothing to fear. Ask them to step forward and be part of the solution!

The current system of privately funded election campaigns has produced governments in Harrisburg and Washington that are unresponsive to the needs of the citizens. And it is no wonder. Responding to the needs of the citizens is the last thing an incumbent needs to do in order to get re-elected to office.

The first thing, and in many cases the ONLY thing an incumbent has to do to get re-elected, is to gather so much money in campaign contributions that no one back home in their district, in the incumbent's party or any other party, will be able to mount a serious campaign against the incumbent. And so, the incumbent's most important job is to take care of their campaign contributors - their "paying customers". And, in return, these "paying customers" take care of the incumbents by making payments to their re-election campaigns. An incumbent's ability to be re-elected doesn't have much to do with taking care of the "folks back home".

In the 2004 election, nearly 98% of incumbent Pennsylvania legislators were re-elected. A similar percentage of Members of Congress were also re-elected. Why? In part, because our system of privately funded elections allows incumbents to collect such large amounts for their re-election campaigns (from lobbyists and other self-interests) that it is almost impossible for other potential candidates to raise enough money to run competitive campaigns against incumbents. In the 2004 election, only 9% of incumbent members of the General Assembly in Harrisburg had challengers in both the primary and general elections.

This arrangement, along with the re-districting process, protects incumbents by making it almost impossible for the citizens to vote them out! As a result, many incumbents are free to attend to their own needs and the needs of their private campaign financers, but they feel no urgency to address the needs of the other citizens, the "non-paying customers".

Due to the pay raise issue and an extraordinary effort by volunteers across Pennsylvania, an unusual number of incumbent elected officials lost in 2006. Still, 88% of incumbent state legislators who ran, won. In Congress, where a 98% incumbent success rate had been the rule for the past 5 elections, in 2006 the rate was 94%.

When elections are not competitive, incumbents are not accountable to the citizens.

When incumbents are not accountable to the citizens, our democracy is broken.

People say they don't like Congress but they like their Representative.

Because privately financed elections create such one-sided election campaigns, voters are bombarded at election time with advertising from the incumbent telling them what a terrific job the incumbent has done. Since there is usually no competition able to purchase significant amounts of opposing advertising, voters seldom see or hear anything but positive information about their incumbent.

And between elections, incumbents already have their own system of publicly financed re-election campaigns! They mail out those bright, beautiful pamphlets telling the voters what a great job they are doing down in Washington or Harrisburg! Some legislators even produce television programs about what a good job they are doing. These "constituent updates" are a form of publicly financed campaigning. It is publicly financed campaigning, but for incumbents only!

Even if you believe that your elected official is completely incorruptible, ask them, "Why not support Clean Elections for the rest of the government?". Elected officials who are doing a good job should have nothing to fear. Ask them to step forward and be part of the solution!