Where The Candidates Stand: An Introduction To The POTUS1 Project [08-01-19]

You're listening to the third season of the podcast, Another Way. This is Adam Icahn. I am the campaigns manager of Equal Citizens. Larry Lessig is on vacation this week, so I am taking his place as the host of this podcast episode. This week we have a wonderful episode planned. With me here in the studio is our are our two summer fellows. We have Naomi Truax.

Hi.

And Danny Holt.

Hello. Hello.

And I'm so happy to have them here in the studio with us today. They have been with us all summer and have done fantastic work, from researching to writing to putting together the topic of this episode, which is our POTUS1 website. So whether you like it or not, the 2020 primaries for the presidential or for the presidency have arrived. It has dominated the media. It has dominated every bit of political discussion that we have in our homes on cable news. It's here, even though it's 2019. So the problem is, is that there are about 10 million candidates running. In reality, I think it's more like 26. But still, it's very hard to keep track of who. Who's even running, let alone what policies they stand for, especially on a subject such as democracy reform, which, if you've been following our work at Equal Citizens, we believe is the most important part of a presidential platform because it is the first issue that must be tackled before any other policies can be passed. And so while the media does not seem to care much about where the candidates stand on these issues, we.

We do.

And we wanted to provide our supporters and Americans all over the country with the opportunity to easily find where the candidates stand on democracy reform issues. So that's what Danny and Naomi did this summer. They put together our webpage called POTUS1, a webpage that contains the policy platforms of every single candidate running. And we've given each candidate a grade based on how their policies stack up to our platform. In other words, are they really supporting the policies that will make the biggest difference to fix our democracy first? And so the two criteria that we have when we're grading a candidate is first, again, which policies they support, and second, whether or not they commit to fixing democracy first, whether or not that will be their top priority before they do anything else. And we've graded them from an F to an A or A plus rather. An F is someone who is an active opponent of these reforms. A D is somebody who has no meaningful democracy reform plan whatsoever. A C is a couple policies here and there that are good on the surface, but not really that wide ranging. A B is A pretty solid platform, but is lacking in a couple areas. An A is somebody who really does understand that our democracy is broken and addresses our broken campaign finance system. The fact that voter suppression is rampant and the fact that gerrymandering, partisan gerrymandering, racial gerrymandering is a major problem in the United States. And of course, an A is somebody who meets all of our criteria, who has the strongest plan, and also commits to fixing democracy first. And so before we get started in terms of going through the candidates today, which Naomi and Danny will do, I just want to give listeners a quick summary of some of the policies we'll be talking about so we can all be on the same page when we're mentioning these kind of technocratic policies that will make our democracy better at equal citizens. We believe that our campaign finance system is broken and the way to fix it is through public financing of elections. It can take many different forms, whether it's through a matching system or democracy vouchers. But the basic idea is that it increases small dollar donations with a match or the government giving each voter a certain number of democracy dollars to give directly to a candidate. It augments the voices of those who don't have the wealth to flood into the political system. Policies like automatic voter registration, where when you interact with a government agency, you're automatically registered to vote. Same day registration that you can vote or you can register to vote on the day of the election. We are going to talk about the different ways candidates are pledging to reform the electoral college, whether or not that's getting rid of the winner take all allocation of electoral votes, or just getting rid of the electoral college altogether. We're going to talk about the ways in which candidates are talk are discussing or proposing federal laws to ban voter suppression like voter IDs, the different plans to end felon disenfranchisement in states across the country. If you're convicted of a felony in some places, even after you are out of jail, you lose the right to vote. We're going to talk about the plans for independent redistricting commissions, so the ways in which we can take the power to draw the maps out of the hands of politicians. And of course we'll talk about ranked choice voting, which is an amazing policy to change the way America votes, where instead of just voting for one candidate, you can rank your candidates in order of preference and that ensures that eventually the candidate who wins will be the one with the majority of votes. We can go into more of a discussion about that later in the episode. So, Naomi, let's start off with our lowest ranking candidate in the field right now. The only candidate to get an F.

Yeah, thanks so much, Adam, for that introduction. As Adam said, the lowest grade of an F indicates an active opponent of our little D democracy. In this election, we have one such candidate, and they happen to be the sitting president, Donald Trump. During his presidency thus far, Trump has revealed himself to be anti representation. He has spread false information about the prevalence and threat of voter fraud, has attempted to politicize and rig the census for partisan gains. And at this moment, I can't say we have good reason to expect this platform to change, but if it does, I know I would be excited to make that amendment to the website.

And it's very interesting with Trump, right? I mean, he ran in 2016 on a platform of draining the swamp, but since getting into office, he's done nothing to drain the swamp, but has only populated it. Whether, you know, through the appointment of, you know, revolving door folks into the administration, you're taking former industry executives and putting them into the halls of power. And certainly, as you said, Naomi, the stuff with the census is really been discouraging. Trying to add this citizenship question that would have really undermined the basis of representation in our country. So, Danny, why don't you get into the next group? The group of candidates that have received a D. Yeah.

So the next tier, we got Bill Weld, John Hickenlooper, and Bill de Blasio. They all get Ds because, you know, honestly, democracy reform is pretty much just absent from their. Their platforms. You know, there's nothing to see here, folks. Bill Weld supports ranked choice voting, which, you know, ranked choice voting. Great. That's a really important thing. Hickenlooper wants D.C. to be a state. Another super important thing. De Blasio wants to overturn Citizens United. All of those are great, but you can't just have one. You need. You need a more comprehensive, wide reaching fabric of policies to actually make a difference. So that's why these guys all get Ds.

And it's awfully interesting. You take someone like Bill de Blasio, right? He's the mayor of New York City, and you'd think that New York City has one of the strongest public financing programs in the country. They've had it since, I think, about 19 or 1988. And in New York City, it's essentially that every small dollar donation is matched by the city at a rate of 8 to 1. So if you give $10 to someone like Bill de Blasio, the city will give or match that contribution with $80 and your $10 donation will become $90. And that's a way to incor to ensure that even those without money can participate in the funding of campaigns. You would think that somebody like de Blasio would make that more of a central point of his campaign because his whole platform has been thus far that, you know, look at what we've done in New York. We can do this across the nation. So I would really like to see, you know, Mr. De Blasio integrate that into his platform. I think that would be a very strong way to really stick out in the field. And weld. Supporting ranked choice voting is really excellent too, because it does show, and we'll talk more about this throughout the episode, is that these, these policies aren't just Democratic policies, you know, capital D Democratic, meaning of the Democratic Party, that Republicans do support these policies, especially with something like ranked choice voting, where it just allows for more voter choice. Naomi, you want to go to the next group of candidates?

I certainly do. So now we have our Cs. This level is made up of numerous candidates who are polling at or below 1%. I'm going to address a couple of these. First off, we have Governor Jay Inslee, big climate champion, but we haven't seen much in the democracy area. We've got Representative Tulsi Gabbard, Representative Tim Ryan, another Governor Steve Bullock, and Representative Seth Moulton. So unlike the D crowd, these five have voiced some more support of this democracy reform we're talking about, but honestly, little at this point that has been meaningful to their platform. So an interesting qualifier to that statement is that Bullock, in some circles is considered to be running on a heavy democracy platform. So insofar as he's talked a lot about dark money as a corrupting force in Washington, and while his voice is worthwhile addition to this ongoing debate about campaign financing and draining the swamp, etc. Etc. We in our organization are not going to give him a better rating until he actually improves upon what those policies could look like to remedy that problem. Really, namely for us, that's going to look like public financing, which has not come up and is speeches and conversations that we've heard. So for all five of these candidates, we believe that because concern about democracy is incredibly high among voters right now, they have a great reason to bring up meaningful reform in their campaigns. By raising these issues of democracy and letting people know how real change can be made, how voices can be heard equally fully without barriers. We really think that that could boost some of these candidates and help them distinguish themselves from this pack of 26.

Yeah, and I want to hit a little bit on the Bullock point, which I think you're right to bring up, is that, you know, this is probably one of our more controversial ratings here because Bullock is the governor of Montana, and he's really made democracy. Well, really money in politics, getting big money in politics, big money out of politics. Rather a center point of his campaign and his governorship in Montana. He was even featured in the movie Dark Money, which came out recently. Great documentary. You know, Bullock's platform is pretty weak, though, on how to democratize political influence. I mean, he doesn't really talk about voter suppression or about how to increase the number of people voting. He doesn't really talk about gerrymandering reform. And as you said, Naomi, he does not mention public financing. I don't know if he supports public financing of elections. And if you really want to democratize how campaigns are funded, we can't just say we want to overturn Citizens United, because the problem has been with us long before 2010, that the average American has had near zero influence in our politics. So we really have to do something a little more radical in terms of democratizing political influence. And so I would really like to see the governor of Montana stake out a stronger claim in terms of his solutions for ensuring a better democracy. Danny, why don't you get into the front runner right now in the Democratic primary? Joe Biden.

Yeah, so we got Joe Biden, also a c. And yes, Adam, he is still the front runner, you know, since the first debate. He took a hit in his lead, but he still seems to be at the top of the heap. And, you know, you were talking about how we need serious radical change to fix our democracy. Biden's not looking to rock the boat here. He's not gonna be the one to make that significant change. You know, like his plans for many other policy areas, Biden's democracy reform plan, it's kind of just about more or less staying the same. You know, he wants statehood for D.C. he wants AVR, increased election security, overturning Citizens United. These are pretty much things that every candidate has. They're kind of the least common denominator. So while they are important, we're not too impressed. He is notably, he is a supporter of public financing of elections, but he has yet to clarify what his plan would be. So, you know, I would love to hear Joe Biden, do you have a really strong public financing plan? Please, please reach out to Us.

Right. And I think. Right. So Biden has really run on an attempt to. Or an appeal to return to the Obama years. Right. That he was vice president for eight years, and a vote for him in some respect is to continue the Obama legacy. On issues of democracy, though, Obama really did not do much. He said he was going to do it when he was campaigning in the run up to 2008, but ultimately, he really did nothing for democracy reform in the United States. And so that's an interesting place where I'd like to see Joe Biden potentially talk about the fact that the Obama administration failed on these issues, that they didn't do anything when they had a supermajority on gerrymandering or on money in politics or much on voting rights, although they did do quite a bit of litigation under the Voting Rights act, although that was gutted in 2013 by the Supreme Court. So that would be something very interesting for one of the other candidates to potentially press the vice president on. The former vice president on. Is the ways in which he sees his potential administration differing from that of the Obama administration on these issues. Naomi, why don't you go to one of the other frontrunners, Kamala Harris.

Yeah. So after a strong debate performance, Senator Kamala Harris situated herself pretty clearly in the top four of this race right now. But like Biden, she pretty much has only has these baseline reforms checked off, those that it would be embarrassing not to address as a frontrunner in this specific field of candidates. Just like Dani was saying, this is statehood. This is for DC this is automatic voter registration, increased election security. And she does address Citizens United. But most interestingly in this platform is that she has talked a fair amount about restoring the Voting Rights act that Adam just mentioned really came down, was gutted in 2013. Super important. I mean, this is. Restoring this could have a really large impact. But as we know, voting is only one piece of this democracy puzzle. So we hope to hear more about what plans she has to increase equal representation, address how campaigns are currently and ought to be financed.

Right. And I should add, I should have mentioned this at the top of the show, that our criteria for what we're giving candidates credit for in terms of what they stand for on these issues is we're looking at what's on their website and what's easily searchable. In other words, we didn't. We didn't scavenge for. For statements in stump speeches in Iowa to see whether or not they supported restoring the Voting Rights Act. If these candidates are serious about restoring Our democracy, it better be on their website. If it's not important enough for it to be on their website, then it's not important enough for that for us to give them credit on POTUS 1. So, Danny, why don't you go to the next group of candidates who get a B rating?

Yeah. So this next chunk, we got Julian Castro, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar and John Delaney. And you know, each of the candidates embraces a number of important reforms. Same day voter registration, automatic voter registration. They all support a couple support ending gerrymandering with independent redistricting commissions, Julian Castro and John Delaney among them. You know, there's a lot of important stuff, but again, all of them could be better. Like Amy Klobuchar, we love to see, you know, ending gerrymandering, ranked choice voting, all of them. It would be great. You know, Cory Booker's really into criminal justice reform. That's an issue that he talks a lot about. It would be great to see the senator support a full end to felon disenfranchisement for, you know, including people currently incarcerated. But, you know, all four of these candidates, they're just lacking in certain areas, unfortunately. Right.

So to be clear here, these are candidates who have very adequate, very decent platforms. We're not, we're not criticizing what they've already come out for, but the problem with these candidates is that they, they maybe are really strong in one or two of the areas in which our democracy is broken, but just not all of them. In other words, voter suppression and gerrymandering, but no money in politics. Or money in politics and gerrymandering, but nothing on voting rights. Yeah. So this isn't to be seen as, as, as necessarily criticism, but an opportunity to really advance their platforms even further. And certainly in comparison with other members of the field right now, they certainly are not the best. So why don't, Danny, why don't you continue with the newest addition to the, the primary, the billionaire Tom Steyer.

Oh, yeah, so Tom Steyer, he's a, he's a billionaire hedge fund manager. He just entered the race this month and he, it's interesting, he's talking about fixing our democracy as a key issue in his campaign. That's what he's putting in the front and center. And yet he said he's going to self fund his campaign with up to $100 million, which, you know, like, he does support some serious reforms, and yet he is currently taking advantage of our undemocratic pay to play political system. So, you know, Tom, if You really want to fix our democracy. Like, you could put those hundred million dollars into ballot initiatives across the country for, you know, ranked choice voting, avr, same day registration. That would be great. Or, you know, better yet, donate to us at Equal Citizens Us. But yeah, he's got some important stuff. You know, probably most notably in Tom Steyer's platform is a vote at home system. He's the only one who's used that language which would like, this is the case in a couple states. You can vote at your house, everyone's mailed a ballot and you just mail it back. And you know, it does great things for turnout. So that's, that's an important thing that Tom Steyer supports.

Yeah. And so a lot of the western states have, have vote at home, and it's very effective in terms of allowing voters more time to go through the ballot. It's less like a pop quiz to go into the polling place and, and be unsure about some of the state or local races that are up. Vote at home is great, but yeah, Danny, I think that's right, that, you know, although, you know, some of us would wish that Mr. Steyer would give democracy reform organizations money. Just kidding, Tom. But his platform isn't bad and he is making democracy reform part of his campaign, that he sees himself as someone who can bring more about climate change and democracy reform into the national discussion. Naomi, you want to go to another front runner right now?

Next up, we have Senator Elizabeth Warren. She has stood out on the basis of pretty extensive policy that she has churned out throughout the course of this campaign. And just a few weeks ago, we were excited to see that Warren put out her plan for democracy reform. There are certainly some good parts. She hit especially hard on the corruption in Washington, going in depth on a lobbying reform plan which would require all lobbyists to register, to ban the revolving door or the ability for lobbyists to move freely in and out of government jobs, and to ban members of Congress from trading stocks and becoming lobbyists for life. These reforms are targeted at the issues of special interest regarding access and accountability in Washington. But this area of focus actually has a serious gap, in our view, which is she has not spoken in favor of public financing for elections, in our view. Without that, Warren's plan to fight massive corruption honestly probably won't mean that much. And we think public financing would fit really nicely into her current plan, actually.

Yeah, I mean, just like with many other issues, she has a plan for democracy and it's very, very good. We certainly are not saying otherwise, but it is very shocking that to this point, Warren has not supported public financing. There's been some ambiguity about whether or not she does support it. But again, if it's not important enough to her to be on her campaign website, where there are a lot of different, very specific policy proposals, then, you know, that's a little bit of a red flag for us in terms of does she really support it? So we would really like to see her put that on her website and make that part of her stump speech moving forward. So let's go to the senator from Colorado, Naomi.

Moving into our A category, Senator Michael Bennett steps ahead of war. And with the addition of his own public financing plan, this is really exciting. And it comes in addition to really extensive stuff. He's called for the elimination of the Electoral College. He supports ranked choice voting. He has extensive voting rights ideas requiring paper ballots, overturning Citizens United regarding money and politics. But one of the things that really stands out to me about the senator is that he has stayed incredibly up to date on these issues throughout 2019. He has been a very responsive candidate when it comes to his reforms and responding to these threats on democracy as they have arisen throughout the campaign. This involves immediately going to his website, going to Twitter, opposing the census question that Trump's administration supported. He's called for a ban on the modern day poll taxes concerning felony disenfranchisement legislation coming out of Florida. I think that this is a real strength of his campaign.

Right.

And he's been rewarded with some very positive press coverage. There was a politico article on June 20, for example, that was titled michael Bennett Pushes Sweeping plan to Remake political System. So this is just more evidence that with these strong plans, there is a lot of upside to running an effective campaign. And Michael Bennett's plan is very, very good. And so we're very pleased to see another A candidate. So, Danny, why don't you go to a friend of this podcast, someone who has appeared on Another Way in the past. Marianne Williamson.

Yeah, Marianne Williamson, friend of the show. She has pledged to fix democracy first. First among this list so far in what we're going through in the show. Yeah, so that actually makes her. Ding, ding, ding, a POTUS 1 candidate. And she's got a really great democracy platform. You know, she wants to eliminate the Electoral College, overturn Citizens United, increase election security, make D.C. and Puerto Rico states, and supports public financing. So, you know, a Williamson presidency would be a great one for democracy reform. One thing we're a little unclear on is on her website Marianne Williamson says she supports a constitutional amendment to establish public financing of federal campaigns. But you don't need a constitutional amendment to do that. And it seems like just a roadblock to what would already be a difficult political battle. So that's something that could be more clear to us here. But, you know, overall, she's got a really great platform.

And so I should say that with Michael Bennett, it's a little unclear whether or not he's a POTUS 1 candidate. He has been cited that democracy reform would be a central part of his campaign. But the difference between someone like the Colorado senator and Marianne Williamson is that Williamson has been on our podcast before and has said that her first act would be to fix our democracy first. So it's a nuance, but it's an important distinction to get someone, one of these candidates, to be a POTUS 1 candidate, because it's really about pledging that this is your first priority if elected president. Danny, why don't you take the next person or the next candidate who has received an A, which is a former senator from Alaska, I'm sure. Actually, few people may know him, but he is running for president. Danny.

Mike Gerville, I believe he's 89 years old, and his campaign is being run by a couple of incredible teens. And, you know, he's not doing so hot in the polls, but he's got a really, really impressive reform platform, and it covers pretty much all the. All the important pieces. Ranked choice, voting, automatic voter registration, public financing of elections. You know, it's all pretty much there. One thing that sets Gravel apart from the rest of the pack with really solid platforms is his congressional reform proposal, which. So it has two pieces. One is he would embrace the Wyoming rule, which would expand the size of the U.S. house of Representatives so that each representative represents a more equal portion of the US Electorate, which would be great. You know, I mean, the. The House of Representatives is supposed to be our. More like one person, one vote style Democratic body in Congress, but we could really shoot. Shoot for hire on that. And he also wants to reconfigure the Senate to reapportion value of each senator's vote based on the population they represent. So, you know, probably unlikely that either of those things will be accomplished under, you know, any president who wins in 2020. But they're really interesting ideas, and I think it's important to be talking about these things.

Right. And so to be clear, Gravel is not really running to win.

He's not.

But he was running to try and make the debates And I don't believe that he has made the debates.

He has not.

And I think that. But the point here is that these are some more, let's call it, radical proposals to ensure that every vote is equal and every vote is equal weight. And so for both the Senate and the House, because of a little bit of wonky math, essentially, not all representatives have equal weight depending upon where they live or where the citizens live.

Yeah.

Naomi, why don't you go to another potus? One candidate, Pete Buttigieg, definitely.

Mayor Pete Buttigieg, has pledged to fix democracy first. And we tend to believe that claim because he has a third thorough plan to back it up. He talked about public financing, independent redistricting commissions, representation for Puerto Rico, and a lot of other really important reforms. We've given Buttigieg an A rather than an A because although we are very impressed with the robust nature of this platform, we think he could do better in a couple of key areas. We'd love to for him to support ranked choice voting, full end to felon disenfranchisement, but overall, this is a real strength in his candidacy, I think.

Yeah.

And we'd also like to see more specifics about what he's really proposing for a public financing plan and a couple other things. But his platform is very, very good. And he's another one of these candidates who released his platform and got. And got quite a bit of media coverage for it. So it's just, it's more evidence to show that, you know, the front running candidates, with the exception of Joe Biden, have released their plans and have gotten very good feedback from them because again, most voters are frankly very angry about the way in which they are alienated from the political system. And so the more candidates are speaking about it, I think the more appeal that they have. Naomi, you want to go to Beto?

Yeah. So another previous guest on the podcast, former Representative Beto o', Rourke, has also pledged to. To fix democracy first. His platform, although it has some flaws, which I will address in a moment, was one of the more exciting ones for me because it came out while we were working on launching this website and it really highlighted how relevant this issue is. It's on our minds and we have to keep pushing it in these conversations. But the plan itself is impressive. In addition to a number of important reforms like same day voter registration and independent redistrict districting commissions to end gerrymandering, he has some other interesting policies around lobbying reform, fixing the Voting Rights act, limiting PAC contributions. But as I alluded earlier, there's one major problem that we have highlighted with the former congressman's democracy platform. O' Rourke has come out in support of public financing of elections. Very cool. But due to the high cap of $500 on fund matching, his plan is actually pretty unlikely to diversify the donor pool, largely defeating the purpose of public financing. We've pushed him a bit on this element and we hope to see it change.

Right.

And so to be clear there, I mean, the basic premise is he's proposing a matching system, and we'll get into a bit about which candidates are supporting a voucher system. But under a matching system, like in New York City, for example, small donors are matched by the government at a certain rate, say 6 to 1, 8 to 1, to augment the power of that small dollar donation under Beto's plan, to echo what Naomi was saying, is that he suggests that any donation up to $500 would be eligible to be matched when most people cannot give above or give $500, let alone $200, let alone $100. Ultimately, that high of a match just means that more wealthy white donors are going to have their donations subsidized by the government. And it's not really going to accomplish the goal, which is to diversify the donor base to make sure that everybody, regardless of those who have wealth, are able to have a political influence so that it's super wonky. But the devils are the devil's in the details when it comes to these kind of. When it comes to these public financing plans. So it's great that he supports it, but we look forward to working with him to try and make it even more effective if, if it were to become law. Danny, please take it away with the senator from Vermont.

All right, Senator Bernie Sanders has a really strong democracy reform platform. He's got a really. He's got a lot of important stuff. Ranked choice voting, you know, representation for D.C. and Puerto Rico, automatic voter registration, a lot of stuff that would really make a huge difference. One thing that sets him apart from the rest of the field is he is the only candidate, save for Mike Gravel, who, you know, special case, because he's not exactly. He's not quite running to win the election. Bernie is the only other candidate who supports a full end to felon disenfranchisement, including giving the right to vote to all incarcerated people, which, you know, in addition to just being a massive symbolic point, it would give the right to vote to a huge amount of people and is a really important part of fixing our Democracy.

And to be clear, Danny.

Right.

That that's not such a radical proposal, because there are currently two states in the United States that do allow for prisoners or those convicted of a felony to vote while in jail. Maine and Vermont. And in both of those places, the program works quite well. And so it's very. It's been very interesting to watch how the window of what is acceptable to talk about in terms of democracy reform has really shifted in the 2020 primary. And that's very exciting, whether or not you agree with that proposal.

Yeah. And one other thing about Bernie is he said he's in favor of public financing of elections, which is great, but we have yet to see a specific plan. And, you know, I think that would fit in really nicely with his platform. Like Naomi was saying with Elizabeth Warren, it would make the kind of popular revolution that Bernie talks about a lot more effective. It would grease the wheels there by, you know, empowering working people across the country as opposed to the current campaign finance system, which prioritizes the voices of rich people.

Right. And that is key, right there, is that Bernie has premised his entire campaign off of a mass mobilization theory of change, that if enough people get involved and kind of attempt to take back the government in terms of engaging in electoral campaigns, in terms of protesting, in terms of advocacy, that change will become possible. But ultimately, change, even a mass mobilization, is still going to come up against roadblocks of our broken democracy. So until we actually defang special interests and increase the political power of ordinary Americans, even a popular movement is still going to come against the brick wall of Washington corruption. And so this. This would be very good for Bernie to integrate into his theory of change. And he's been talking about these issues for a very, very long time. This is not new, but what we're saying is we'd like to see it a little more front and center. And actually, I think that that would really help him on the campaign trail because it would make much more sense to people in explaining his definition of the, quote, unquote, political revolution. Danny, let's talk about another friend of equal citizens who he appeared at one of our town halls in New Hampshire, Mr. Andrew Yang.

Yeah, Andrew Yang got a really. Another really, really strong democracy platform. He's got a lot of solutions. On the more technical side, like, he is, I think, the only candidate to talk about promoting the use of the efficiency gap to measure partisan gerrymandering, which is a really, like, wonky thing. But, you know, sometimes these things are important. He talks about ending gerrymandering with an independent, redistricting commissions, ranked choice voting, automatic voter registration, overturning Citizens United, a lot of really great stuff. The one thing that really sets Andrew Yang apart is his support for democracy Vouchers for public financing of elections. Yang wants to give every eligible American voter $100 in what he calls Democracy dollars during each federal election cycle. And they can use that to support the candidate of their choosing, which would make a huge difference. And it's a lot like, you know, Democracy Dollar proposals in Seattle that are going on right now. Right.

And so let's dig a bit into here because this is very important. So what they did in Seattle in 2017 was the first election they did this had passed via ballot initiative in 2015. So it went into effect for the first time in 2017 in Seattle. The program is that every resident of Seattle gets four $25 vouchers that they can only use to give to eligible municipal candidates. So unlike a matching system like we talked about in New York City, it requires no upfront money to participate that anybody, even if you're homeless, for example, you are eligible for these vouchers and you can use them at no cost to you. And so what that does is it's like the most radical way to diversify the electorate in many different ways and to ensure that your own net worth does not, or even regardless of your net worth, you have the right and the ability to participate in the election before the election, which is the money primary. So voucher programs are really, you know, game changing. And so Yang has taken that proposal or that law in Seattle and wants to scale it up to the. To federal elections with $100 worth of democracy dollars. Naomi, why don't you go? I mean, I should say Yang is one of two on our list to receive the grade of an A plus. And so that's on one part because he has a very strong platform. And again, he's also a POTUS 1 candidate. He has pledged to fix democracy first. Yeah, Naomi, let's go to our. The last candidate on the list, the only other candidate to be a POTUS 1 candidate and get an A plus. Kirsten Gillibrand, Senator from New York.

Yeah, so the senator is certainly a friend of equal citizens. She was not only a guest on a previous episode of the podcast, but we had her up at a town hall, a democracy town hall that we held in Portsmouth, New Hampshire just a couple weeks ago. Now, she has pledged to fix democracy first, and once again, she has a lot to back that up. Senator Gillibrand has by far the most impressive public financing plan that would give each potential voter $600 in total of what she's calling democracy dollars. These vouchers that Adam was explaining just a moment ago. So that's $600 to give to federal election candidates of the voters choice.

And so she was really, really great at our. At our town hall. And both Andrew Yang and Kirsten Gillibrand were really great. And the fun part of holding these town halls was to see the reaction from the audience when someone like Gillibrand explained her platform, because people were legitimately very enthusiastic when she was talking about something like same day registration or ranked choice voting. In fact, one of the audience members asked the question about ranked choice voting, and her response was, yeah, I support it. And the audience, you know, I mean, it's almost. It was almost a standing ovation because the idea that a presidential candidate would support such a foundational democracy reform, such as ranked choice voting, you know, was honestly very surprising. It's very surprising for a lot of voters to see candidates talk about these issues. And so although both the senator from New York and Andrew Yang are not necessarily frontrunners right now, the mere fact that they're talking about it is pushing the discussion towards a more democratic end. And it's exciting voters in the process that the new baseline for what voters expect of presidential candidates has shifted as more and more candidates have come out in favor of these once radical reforms. And I mean radical. Not in like a radical left, radical right, but radical democracy. Getting to the root, striking at the root. So this has been a really exciting thing to watch, especially for a lot of us veteran reformers, but also I hope for both of you who are relatively new to this reform movement. All right, now that we've gone through all the different candidate platforms, I wanted to turn the discussion to you guys. Danny and Naomi. Which of the policies that we've discussed are the ones that you want to see discussed more on the campaign trail in the media? Which of the policies that excite you both most as young reformers?

Yeah, I would say public financing of elections, because, I mean, one, it's important just on a base level for everyone in the country to be able to have an equal voice. But also it really hits at pretty much all of the major issues in American politics, like, you know, climate change, criminal justice reform, immigration, defense, and foreign policy. You know, like these really big corporations like the natural gas and oil companies, private prison companies, who run a lot of the border camps. You know, they're funneling money into our political system to get the results that benefit them monetarily. So I think if we talk about public financing in a way that intersects with all of these issues, that would be really great in my eyes and

probably very good for the campaign trail to make those connections between the inability to create change and, you know, our lax campaign finance laws, the lack of political power that most Americans have. So I think you're absolutely right. Naomi, what about you?

Yeah, I would definitely reiterate just what Danny said about public financing because we have this outside special interest money in our elections that are really rupturing representation. I know Kirsten Gillibrand talked about this during the town hall, and that was one of the most powerful moments for me. She's like, we need our politicians to be held accountable to their constituents. Those are the voices that should be mattering. They should be speaking the loudest in Washington. And I think that public financing, having people having candidates condemn and push away special interest money and just switch their attention to the voters, I think that would have a huge, huge impact in all of these areas.

And she did have a great line when she was talking about her public financing plan, which was something along the lines of, and I'm paraphrasing that I wouldn't be doing fundraisers. Like, you really think that I want to be at these high price fundraisers, or you think I'd rather be with my constituents and learning about which issues most affect them? And I think it would just make, you know, ultimately public financing would just make the experience of being a politician better. Well, Danny, Naomi, thank you so much for a wonderful discussion and for all your work this summer. This POTUS1 website is really something that everyone at Equal Citizens is proud of and we could not have done it without both of you.

Yeah. Thank you.

Thanks so much, Adam.

It's been great to be a part of it.

Thanks so much for listening to this episode of Another Way. Next week, Lessig will be back to talk about democracy reform in the 2020 presidential primaries. If you'd like to learn more about what we talked about in this episode, Please visit our POTUS 1 page at equalcitizens. US POTUS 1 p o t u s and the number one. This is Adam Icken. Thanks so much for listening,

Sam.