Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 22:58:06 -0400 From: Matthew Belmonte To: nita.lowey@mail.house.gov (Nita Lowey) Subject: HR 2477 and HR 2478 The 1996 election was a showcase of the apathy and ennui that are always produced by artificially constrained, one-dimensional debate. Voters stayed away from the polls in droves as Democrats and Republicans tried to magnify their differences and to create a contest worth voting for. The voices of minor parties were conspicuously absent from this discourse. This is a shame, since third-party agendas and criticisms enliven political discourse and often lead to very productive modifications of the mainstream political agenda. HR 2477, the Voter Freedom Act, and HR 2478, the Debate Freedom Act, would give third parties the voice that they deserve. By doing so, they would enrich the ideas and policies of the major parties. The Voter Freedom Act would level the playing field for ballot access, by reducing the total number of signatures needed to qualify for the ballot in all fifty states. Gathering these signatures is a major expense, and, since the publicity garnered by ballot access is what leads to an increase in contributions, the effort to get onto the ballot is often a catch-22 for parties with small capital reserves. The Debate Freedom Act would require that presidential candidates who accept taxpayer-funded subsidies for their campaign costs debate any opponent who qualifies for the ballot in at least forty states. This is only fair; if the electorate is asked to bear the costs of the campaign, then its members should receive genuine debate, not slogans and soundbites, in exchange for their tax money. The passage of these bills would benefit members of all parties, large and small. I hope that they'll have your support when they come to the floor.