The Weekly Wonk - “What could I have done if I had the money?”As a political consultant before becoming a political scientist, Michael Miller heard that question often from candidates who lost campaigns. He decided to move that question from the rhetorical to the empirical: what did political candidates do differently when they were freed from some or all of the obligations of fundraising?Most of the news about money in politics is dismal. The sheer amount of spending – especially outside spending through SuperPACs and non-profits – has exploded. New members of the House of Representatives are advised to spend four hours a day calling potential donors. But behind all that, a set of promising experiments has been unfolding at state and local levels, in the form of partial or full public financing of elections. With some of these programs now in their second decade, Miller rigorously tested their effects on the culture of politics. Do different people run? Are candidates able to spend less time fundraising? Do they reach out to different people? He answered these questions in his recent book, Subsidizing Democracy: How Public Funding Changes Elections and how it can Work in the Future.See on weeklywonk.newamerica.net
