Why It Should Be Easier to Run for Office
Across the U.S., ballot access laws vary wildly—some require thousands of dollars in filing fees (like SC’s ~$3,480 for House, ~$20,000 for Prez), or tens of thousands of signatures in tight timeframes brennancenter.org+2uhero.hawaii.edu+2newyorker.com+2fjc.gov+3ballotpedia.org+3en.wikipedia.org+3. These barriers effectively exclude everyday citizens and favor the wealthy or party insiders.
Proposed reforms:
-
Cap or eliminate filing fees for federal races.
-
Allow lower signature thresholds.
-
Give petitioners 90+ days to collect valid signatures.
💵 Public Campaign Financing & Small-Donor Matching
Heavy reliance on wealthy donors creates imbalance. Public match systems (like NYC’s 1:7 matching on small $10 gifts) empower grassroots campaigns fec.govtimesunion.comcampaignlegal.org+6brennancenter.org+6timesunion.com+6. Reviews (e.g., Brennan Center, Campaign Legal Center) show public funding restores accountability to voters, not donors ngpvan.com+15campaignlegal.org+15brennancenter.org+15.
Our plan:
-
Launch South Carolina pilot: small-donor matching (e.g., $50 → $300).
-
Offer optional public financing to limit big-money influence.
-
Set transparent spending caps.
✅ Gov‑funded General Election Runoffs
For the final two candidates in federal/state races, public funds would finance general election advertising, evenly split. This ensures:
-
Fair exposure without spending races.
-
Accountability to voters—not wealthy contributors.
✔️ Encouraging Broader Participation
These ballot and finance reforms would:
-
Lower cost of entry—welcome genuine citizen candidates.
-
Help non-rich individuals stay in races.
-
Promote diverse, community-focused ideas.
