Would Public Funding Allow a Robust Third Party in US Politics?

Question

Right now we have a choice between two sides of the same coin - both parties put party politics and influence peddlers above national interests to one degree or another. If we instituted a Public Funding policy for US elections, and eliminated all private donations, would it allow a third political party to become viable and would that be a good thing or a bad thing?

Answer 1

Eventually people would find a way to corrupt that system. I'm all for a 3rd or even more parties. One or the other usually forces the citizen to stick to a party line or pick the lesser of two evils. With more parties, I think there would be better debate and more need for compromise, and better party platforms.

Answer 2

More parties will eventually emerge, but not any time soon. We have been running a two party system that is obviously out of date, but they're so powerful that there would have to be a tremendous outcry and support for a new or more parties. The parties are so powerful that incumbents rarely lose elections and third parties almost never beat a Dem or Rep in any type of election. As far as the private funding goes, I don't think that has much to do with the party system because companies will line the pockets of dems and republicans so they can get their issues the majority votes in the house and in the senate they'll need to pass. Private funding is a detriment to a true democracy, but I don't think it has much to do with the party system.

Answer 3

I think it would indeed make a viable third party. However, the Republicans and Democrats both know they stand to lose everything, if they let another party win any sort of spotlight or attention by the public. They are wielding prejudice against others, so that they may appear to be right, and therefore keep their power.

Answer 4

there is various reasoning. The media promotes the Democrats and Republicans yet ignores 0.33 activities. yet another component is the crew that's in cost of organizing debates makes regulations to deliberately exclude 0.33 party applicants, some thing the League of ladies human beings votes adverse at the same time as they wee forced out contained in the overdue '80s.

Answer 5

Probably not, most people would still be afraid that by voting 3rd party the greater of two evils would get elected.

Answer 6

I hesitate to publicly support a party that cannot garner private support. Sounds like a terrible waste of taxpayer money.

Answer 7

the number of parties is not the issue, its the money and the favors that make elections nothing more than a business deal.

Answer 8

it's a excellent idea.