Juries are a far better basis for the public funding of elections. In much the same way that a jury could choose a politician for office, it could award public funding for a politician to run in a popular election. The winning candidate chosen by a jury could be given ample funding for the election. One or several of the top runners-up could also be funded.
Funding politicians by jury has similar advantages to choosing politicians by jury. Funds would be allocated on an informed basis. Candidates seeking funds would be on a level playing field unskewed by special interests, political parties and the media. No portion of the public would be underrepresented.
Using juries to put election rules and the public funding of elections on a very democratic basis would be helpful. However, by no means would it fix all of the serious flaws popular election has compared to choosing politicians by jury.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
