Seattle voters will soon get $100 in ‘democracy vouchers’ to donate to candidates
Seattle voters will receive “democracy vouchers” for the first time next week.
The Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission plans to mail the taxpayer-funded campaign-contribution vouchers on Tuesday to every registered voter in the city.
Each voter will get four $25 vouchers to distribute among candidates in 2017. The City Council’s two citywide seats and the City Attorney’s Office are up for election.
The vouchers will be part of mayoral races starting in 2021 but won’t be allocated to candidates as Ed Murray seeks re-election next year. Mayoral races are the city’s most expensive and the wait will allow the voucher program more time to accumulate funds.
Seattle voters ensured the city would be the first in the country with democracy vouchers when they approved Initiative 122 in 2015. The “Honest Elections” measure authorized a 10-year, $30 million property-tax levy to pay for the program.
I hate that name for the voucher, it sounds like something from a bad propoganda piece.Report
“Worker’s Cadre Exhortation Scrip”?Report
Oh that’s worse!
What’s wrong with “campaign voucher”?Report
Can any of us REALLY vouch for democracy at this point?Report
So what is the difference between me donating my money and the gov’t taking my money and then giving it back to me to donate? Ah liberals and their good ideas.Report
It’s a public campaign finance scheme.Report
More like a scam.Report
Naming aside, it’s not a bad idea as far as ideas of public campaign financing go. It addresses one of the big weaknesses of the concept.Report
Can you honestly say you looked at that process without chuckling a little?
(It’s like they freebase Rube Goldberg before designing these things)Report
Let’s just say I voted no on the statewide initiative for the same idea.Report
Do you know that all liberals are in favor of this idea and no conservatives are?Report
Were there any conservatives in Seattle pushing this?Report
If you don’t know, what are you making categorical statements?Report
This is a typical liberal scam to push public financing.Report
You ain’t seen nothing yet.
There are proposals afoot to socialize the entire Police department, and have the government take over the sewer lines.
Truly, we will stop at nothing.Report
Oh, I’ve seen this one. People either end up dead or smelly.Report
Ah, because not knowing has never stopped you. Silly to have asked.Report
Did you not notice who you were responding to? He’d rather make categorial statements about liberals than breathe air .Report
And yet I still haven’t heard that liberals in Seattle aren’t responsible for this. Because it sure isn’t conservatives that run that area.Report
“Seattle voters”… I imagine there was a conservative or two among them.Report
Sure, one or two. Maybe a third one but conservatives don’t run the place, no matter how you try to frame it. If this is such a great thing then wave the red flag proudlyReport
notme,
You oughta remember that just because they got a D beside their name, don’t exactly mean they’re liberal. Plenty of conservatives do that, and more in places you don’t expect than places you do.
Machines are always conservative, after all.Report
http://honestelectionsseattle.org/endorsements/
Why don’t you do an analysis of all those who endorsed and tell us what you find.Report
Based on the names, and clicking through to the web sites of some of the more ambiguous ones, I don’t see a single identifiably conservative organization on that list, and the vast majority are clearly left-wing. It’s possible that some of the individuals are conservative or centrist, but from what I can see this list supports notme’s assumptions.
Edit: Didn’t realize that this was from a week ago.Report
If I was a bartender…
“Aaron David for council! The kickbacks pay for themselves!”Report
How does one become a “candidate”?
If these were funds that would have gone to candidates anyway and are now still going there but the direction is being determined by the voters, that has both pros and cons.
If this is on top of existing funding, I see mostly cons.
I think?Report
Thinking further…
Using existing funds:
Pros – getting funding to non-major party candidates; no additional costs to taxpayers
Cons – very unbalanced funding could lead to entrenching existing power structures/major parties
Using new funds:
Pros – mitigating unbalanced funding but not stopping it
Cons – where does the money come from?
The “pro” here is only in relating to the other options as opposed to the status quo.Report
Do you have to give your vouchers to four different people or can you give all your vouchers to one?
This seems to be a recipe for feedback loops.Report
Time for some game theory?Report
Kazzy already touched on what strikes me as the most likely outcome: people will give their voucher to the parties that they’re most likely to have heard of and, more than that, they’re most likely to give their vouchers to the parties they’re most likely to vote *FOR*.
And, given it’s Seattle, I’m guessing that it’ll be a 60/40 skew.
Perhaps 10% of the 60% will give one of their four vouchers to a third party… but, hey. Maybe that’s the best outcome.
The weird and obscure parties now have an opportunity to get scraps from the table when, before, they had to rely entirely on true believers.
Now they can, occasionally, get a windfall from someone feeling guilty that they were thinking about giving all of their vouchers to the dems who caves and decides that, maybe, one of the four should be redistributed to the Nutrition Party.Report
Or this: “major” candidates’ “volunteers” GOTV by engaging in “voucher relief” by making a personal “cash donation” to the voucher holder in exchange for “support” from the “interested citizen”.Report
OOOH DUDE I WILL SELL MY VOUCHERS FOR FIFTY CENTS ON THE DOLLARReport
A website will pop up posting daily Democracy Voucher Exchange Rates for each candidate so citizens can make informed market-based-democracy choices…Report
“Did you hear? Wally got 55% for his vouchers.”
“That jerk! I only got 48.5% for mine! Who gave it to him? THE NUTRITION PARTY?!? I’m going to vote Natural Law just to spite *ALL* of them!”Report
{{because I’m lazy…}}
1. Can citizens donate money above the voucher maximum, or is each citizen limited to only the voucher amount?
2. Are there any restrictions or limitations on “candidates” seeking a piece of that luscious Democracy Voucher money? (Does Jill Stein live in Seattle??)
3. Oscar’s right, the name really sucks.Report