How to ensure Congress hears the people more than big donors | John H. Cox

Americans are fed up with political corruption. They see a government that too often seems to serve the powerful while ordinary families struggle with the cost of housing, health care, energy and groceries. They see politicians promising change who return to Washington to favor those who finance their campaigns.

This frustration is no longer confined to one party or ideology. A Gallup poll in September found 89% of respondents believe corruption is widespread in the federal government, the highest level recorded in two decades. In October, a CNBC survey found that corruption had become voters’ leading concern ahead of the midterm elections, surpassing even the cost of food and gas.

These numbers should alarm every American, regardless of political affiliation. When so many citizens believe their government is corrupt, we have a problem that cannot be solved by simply electing the other party.

We need to change the system itself.

Running for Congress is extraordinarily expensive. Candidates must raise enormous sums, purchase advertising and compete for attention in sprawling media markets.

That creates an obvious problem: When politicians need millions of dollars to win office, who has the greatest opportunity to get their attention? It is the wealthy donor, the corporate political action committee, the lobbyist or the organized interest with the resources to gain access and influence.

Consider the scale of today’s political spending. Elon Musk poured about $474 million into the midterms, primarily to help Republicans retain control of Congress. Meanwhile, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg committed about $80 million in September and October to help Democrats. Their political priorities differ, but the underlying reality is the same: A handful of extraordinarily wealthy Americans can deploy sums of money that ordinary citizens could never hope to match.

Neither donor should be presumed to have purchased a particular policy outcome because of these contributions. Both have the right to participate in our democracy. But their spending illustrates an extraordinary imbalance with average Americans.

This is not a Republican or a Democratic problem. It is structural.

In my book, "Slay the Four Plagues: A Realistic Revolutionary Plan to Fix Democracy," I examine the destructive effects of special-interest influence, big media control, negative campaigning and extreme partisan voices. These problems reinforce one another.

Large districts make campaigns expensive. Expensive campaigns increase dependence on fundraising. Fundraising elevates donors and organized interests. Candidates then rely on mass media and increasingly negative, partisan messages to reach voters.

Hear the People, a bipartisan, grassroots movement, offers a solution: community districts.

Under our proposal, each congressional district would be divided into 100 smaller communities of about 7,500 people. Each of these community districts would elect a representative for a two-year term. Those 100 community representatives would select one of their own to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives. The other 99 would remain in their communities, providing a continuing local connection to the member of Congress.

Today, one member of Congress represents roughly 750,000 people. No elected official can know that many constituents personally. Candidates must rely on expensive ads, professional political operations and fundraising to reach them.

A community representative serving 7,500 people could know the neighborhood, hear residents’ concerns directly and build accountability through personal relationships. Voters could evaluate representatives they actually know.

Because campaigns at this local scale would not require such expensive media operations, the system could substantially reduce the role of campaign money and mass media in determining who advances to Congress.

This would not eliminate every form of corruption, guarantee wise decisions or make political disagreements disappear. But it could change the incentives, benefiting the voices of ordinary people.

Our proposal is designed to be pursued state by state. We have a legal opinion supporting its constitutionality and developed model legislation to help states consider implementation. We believe Article I of the Constitution provides states authority over the manner of electing House members. So a constitutional amendment isn't needed.

Republicans and Democrats will continue to disagree about taxes, health care and more, which is part of a healthy democracy. But neither party should be comfortable with the current system.

Congress should answer to the people — not to donors, lobbyists or political professionals.

It is time to bring Congress down to human scale and give communities a direct voice in Washington. Our representatives must be accountable to the people they serve.

That is what Hear the People is working to accomplish. Our democracy deserves nothing less.