No on Proposition 89
What Rep. Pelosi fails to understand is the same erroneous thought process that is the basis for Proposition 89, which would create "clean money" elections to "level the playing field". Essentially, if Prop 89 passes, candidates who qualify would be eligible for government financing if they choose to eschew private contributions. If the opposing candidate out-fundraises the "clean money" candidate, the Government will match that amount, thus ensuring that each candidate has equal funds, contradictory to the support=money scenario above. Whether or not you deserve the financial support, the government will give it to you. We should all recognize government funded elections as a huge failure, contradictory to the US system.
In our current financing scheme a candidate who supports an extreme ideal is unlikely to gain much support, and will, thus, not gain much financial backing, lowering his chances in the election. This is a logical cause-and-effect scenario. However, under the somewhat socialist model proposed by proposition 89, such extreme candidates will be entitled to equal financial backing, paid for by the state. After all, we wouldn't want him to be at a disadvantage. Prop 89 fails to understand why a candidate does not have financial support.
The concept that Proposition 89 will somehow eliminate corruption is also absurd, and seems to rely on the mistaken premise that political contributions are nothing more than bribes. Rather, political contributions are a type of freedom; freedom of speech/expression by allowing people and companies to support the candidates they wish. Occassionally a candidate can be bought. Yet, even with public financing a candidate is still able to accept personal bribes. Consider Rep. Duke Cunningham, or Senator Harry Reid.
Proposition 89 would not level the playing field, it would give an extra advantage to those who don't deserve it at the expense of those who do. It would stifle the freedom of expression we currently enjoy, and create an unfair, unrepresentative financial support system. If one wants to target corruption, there are better ways to do it.
Cross Posted at California Conservative