Public campaign financing supporters ~ Yesterday, Ken Garcia, the ranting ideologue who writes a column for the Examiner, wrote his latest op-ed attacking the public campaign financing program in San Francisco. Of course, his arguments were empty, as usual, but it presents a great opportunity for us to get pro-public financing letters into the paper. *Can you take a few minutes to draft a letter to the editor?* If we get a few in, we'll usually get one or two printed. Here is a link to the article: http://www.sfexaminer.com/opinion/columns/ken_garcia/Guess_who_foots_bill_fo... *Please send letters to letters@sfexaminer.com.* They should be around or less than 150 words. And you MUST put your name, address and phone number at the end of the letter since they usually call to verify your identity. *And here are some talking points you can use if you like: * *1.* Garcia implies that it's easy to qualify for public financing. In reality, out of 7 open seats, only 19 candidates have qualified. That's an average of less than 3 qualified candidates per race. To qualify, candidates must show community support by raising a large number of small donations. *2.* Public campaign financing levels the playing field and ensures that voters have the opportunity to make a decision based on the merits and ideas of the candidates, rather than their fundraising abilities. *3. *Campaign donations are a form of legalized bribery, wherein politicians are expected to give favors to their large donors. Public financing ensures that candidates are accountable to the public, rather than wealthy special interests. *4. *Both Barack Obama and John McCain are big supporters of public financing. McCain supported public funding in Arizona and Obama has co-sponsored a bill for public funding of congressional campaigns. *5. *Public financing SAVES money. The cost in San Francisco is currently capped at $2 million per year, but the cost of favors to contributors is far more. We just spent $700 billion in congress, in giveaways to large financial institutions, because of their power over the political process. Here are some local examples as well: http://voterownedelections.org/save_money.html Here is the letter that I sent: Editor ~ Ken Garcia implies in his recent column that just about anyone can get public funds to run for Supervisor. Nothing could be further from the truth. In order to qualify, candidates have to raise a large number of small donations to prove a wide base of public support. The sad fact is that it requires a lot of money to run for public office, and when candidates rely on massive amounts of private money, they are often expected to give inappropriate favors to their donors in exchange. In the absence of public financing, only candidates who are willing to do the bidding of well-funded special interests have a chance to compete. It's no wonder voters feel they have a government controlled by real estate speculators, oil industry executives and the like. I suspect this is why Garcia is against public campaign financing. He tends to believe that these wealthy special interests are somehow more responsible than the rest of us, and therefore, should be the ones calling the shots in government. I disagree. Rob Arnow 24 Lander St. San Francisco, CA 94114 415-596-5808 -- San Franciscans for Voter Owned Elections www.voterownedelections.org 415-552-2229