Remove Financial Barriers to Running for Office
By Jesse Mermell
When Liuba Grechen Shirley ran for Congress in 2018, her kids were toddlers. In order to run a campaign - a ‘round-the-clock endeavor - she would need help. Childcare doesn’t come cheap, especially when added on top of Grechen Shirley’s household expenses and student loans. And so she successfully petitioned the Federal Election Commission to allow her to use campaign funds to cover the costs of childcare, removing a barrier for working parents who are considering a run for Congress.
This decision was a clear victory for one candidate but only the tip of the iceberg for women running for office.
I know from experience. Having just run for Congress in my home district in Massachusetts, I understood before I decided to run that being a candidate would be a full time job. Moonlighting simply wouldn’t cut it.
After 20 years working exclusively for non-profits and in government, despite living frugally and steadily saving, I was far from able to self fund. Growing up, my family always had a roof over our heads and food on the table, but I’m the daughter of a small business owner in rural Pennsylvania. A trust fund baby I am not. I own a small, one bedroom condo and decided that serving my neighbors and my country was a worthy reason to incur the debt of pulling from home equity to pay my bills after my savings ran out. This is a choice I know many potential candidates don’t have, and I was unquestionably privileged to be able to make.
My campaign lasted 11 months. A question: who can afford to be without income for nearly a year to run for office? Statistically speaking, not the diverse voices who are clearly the exception to the rule in so many halls of power, the voices we as progressives know must lead our work. BIPOC candidates. Disabled candidates. Young candidates. LGBTQ+ candidates. Candidates from low-income backgrounds. Women, especially single women.
About that last part. That’s also me. I have been in a loving relationship with a wonderful man for nearly 9 years, but we’re not married and we live separately. Our finances are our own. Those aforementioned bills are all on me. This, to those who haven’t gotten the memo (ie much of Congress), is a pretty common relationship in 2020.
Federal campaign finance law prohibits a candidate from receiving personal financial gifts. If my partner had wanted to pitch in and pay an electric bill or take care of the cost of my cell phone to help ease my financial burden during the campaign, he couldn’t. Same goes for any of my incredibly supportive friends. It would have been a violation of the law, possibly even considered a bribe. Clearly protecting against corruption in political circles is vitally important, especially these days. But in doing so, our laws have also erected another structural barrier to a more representative government.
Currently, federal candidates can receive a salary from their campaigns, based on a percentage of their previous income. But that’s only possible once a candidate is officially on the ballot. Often, a campaign has been up and running for many months before that milestone is reached. And in many circles it’s still frowned upon when candidates actually exercise this option. In Massachusetts, candidates for state office can’t take any salary from their campaigns at all. One way to lower this structural barrier would be to extend the period of time during which a candidate can earn a salary from the campaign, or even just allow it in the first place. No public funds would be used for this, and it would soften the financial blow for many — not just single women like me. It shouldn’t take the privilege of homeownership or the sacrifice of incurring personal debt to make seeking public office possible.
These challenges aren’t limited to campaigns. For many who would consider seeking down ballot offices where pay is minimal or non-existent, the need to keep one’s lights on makes public service a non-starter. In my hometown of Brookline, MA - a community of about 60,000 people that borders Boston - the most senior elected official in our entire community is granted a $4,500 annual salary for approximately 20 hours of work a week. Every election season I hear from qualified and talented potential candidates who have much to offer our town, but who never mount a campaign because the math just doesn’t work. That means two things: First, Brookline and other communities with token compensation for their elected leaders miss out on the diversity of lived experiences, ideas, and priorities that come from a government that is actually inclusive. Second, the pipeline of leaders who actually reflect America remains narrow since many officials from State Houses to Capitol Hill got their start in lower level positions. Both outcomes hold our progressive movement back.
Talking about personal finances makes a lot of people squeamish. I’d certainly rather not discuss mine in public. But candor is more important than comfort if we’re going to create change, and I’m grateful that conversations about the financial obstacles to seeking office and to serving are becoming more commonplace. They must be in order to make public service accessible to those who aren’t members of the 1 percent. After becoming the youngest woman ever elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was frank about struggling to afford rent for an apartment in Washington. Liuba Grechen Shirley, and later Senate candidate M.J. Hegar, spoke out and won on the issue of paying for child care on their campaigns. And progressive leaders have been beating the drum for years calling for comprehensive campaign finance reform, including overturning Citizens United, to make progress in leveling the playing field around how campaigns are funded.
Clearly the structural barriers are plentiful but they can and should be dismantled.
I’m grateful my campaign was possible. How many people whose talent and lived experiences would add incredible value to the political process are boxed in at the consideration phase of a campaign because, like most Americans, they have rent to pay, loans to cover, and mouths to feed? Too many. My campaign didn’t end the way I had hoped, but it did solidify my resolve to put myself out there in service of justice and equity.
A good place to start is by making it easier for others to do the same.
Jesse Mermell was a candidate for Congress in MA-04 in the 2020 Democratic primary.