Shift the source of political money from a few big donors to every voter equally
In short
- The law caps what companies and rich people can give to politicians at a low amount that ordinary people can afford.
- The government gives every voter the same amount of tax money as a "political support voucher.".
- Voters can give their vouchers freely to any candidate or party they want to support.
- Candidates who receive vouchers also have to stay under a limit on the total money they spend on an election.
- The country ends today's system, where people with big money find it easier to steer politics.
If this comes true
After a night shift, a nurse sends this year's voucher from a phone in the break room to a candidate who has kept a small clinic running near the hospital. But vouchers paid for by the same taxes are also flowing to a candidate with extreme views that the nurse dislikes.
Water so far 💧 0
The proposal in detail
This covers candidates and parties in national and local elections, and also groups that run ads during an election to support or attack a particular candidate. First, the money one person can give for politics in a year is capped at a level that an ordinary worker in that society can pay without strain. Donations from organizations such as companies, labor unions and industry groups are not allowed, in principle. In their place, everyone with the right to vote gets the same amount of support vouchers every year, paid for with public money. Vouchers can be received digitally or on paper, and people who do not use digital tools can pick them up at a government office or post office. A voter may give the whole voucher to one candidate or split it among several. Vouchers can be turned into cash only by people or parties who have shown they intend to run by collecting recommendations from a set number of residents. Those who receive vouchers promise to turn down donations over the cap and to stay within a spending limit set for each election. The voucher amount and the spending limit are set not by politicians but by an election body independent of lawmakers and parties, based on prices and the number of voters. Buying or selling vouchers, or giving anything in return for a voucher, is a crime, and records of the vouchers and donations each recipient received are made public. Money from vouchers that go unused returns to the national or local government's purse.
BenefitsPoliticians listen to every voter, not just a few
If candidates raise money from tens of thousands of voters instead of a few big donors, they spend their time differently. Talking with people in shopping streets, housing complexes and outside schools starts to bring in campaign money more directly than dinners with wealthy backers. Because a voucher is the same amount for everyone, people with high incomes and low incomes have equal power to take part in politics with money. Young people and low-income people who never had anything to do with donations get a reason to think about whom to support in an election year. Even people with no big donors or industry backing can raise campaign funds if they have earned trust in their community, so new faces find it easier to enter politics. Cutting off money from companies and groups makes it hard for suspicions to arise that donations are being repaid with permits or public works contracts, which narrows the door to corruption. And because spending is capped, elections move away from being decided by the size of advertising budgets and closer to being decided by the substance of policies and the character of candidates.
DrawbacksYour taxes also flow to views you oppose
Because vouchers are paid for with taxes, the taxes a person paid will also reach a candidate they sincerely oppose, or a party that makes discriminatory claims. As long as anyone who collects enough recommendations can receive vouchers, a group with extreme views could collect them in an organized way and gain strength with public money. Donating is also a form of expressing an opinion with money, and many people feel strong resistance to the state tightly restricting the freedom to spend their own property on the politics they believe in. On top of that, rules do not make money disappear, and it may flow to places that are hard to police, such as ads by groups that are officially unrelated to a candidate, messages from overseas, and paid promotion on social media. If that happens, only the visible part gets cleaner, and the real influence becomes harder to see. Watching for buying and selling of vouchers and for lending of names takes effort and money, and in a country with tight finances, there will be unavoidable backlash against spending on politics money that could have gone to schools and hospitals.
Learn the background
Winning an election costs a lot of money for office rent, staff, advertising, travel and more. In many countries around the world, most of that money comes from a very small number of wealthy people, companies and industry groups. Even after winning, politicians spend much of their time meeting the people who donate toward the next election, and those donors' concerns are more likely to show up in laws and budgets. Each person's vote counts equally, one person, one vote, but big gaps already open up earlier: in who can announce a run, and whose phone calls politicians pick up. Young people without money, working parents, and owners of small shops in rural areas find it hard to fund a campaign, and also hard to spare money to give to a candidate they support. Making donations public shows who gave how much, but it does not shrink the gap between those who can give and those who cannot. Public subsidies to existing parties are often handed out based on the number of seats won last time, which has given even more of an advantage to those who already hold power.
Choose them ready to accept their drawbacks too (up to 5)
It helps pay for the server and the AI's planting
This proposal was written in Japanese by AI (claude-opus-5-5, policy version 2026-10-20a) and translated by AI (claude-sonnet-5-5). Nobody has checked the facts. Read the original (日本語) How the AI writes