Campaign cash does not come in small increments, from ordinary citizens. Rather, it flows from multinational corporations, their wealthy directors, and the Political Action Committees they control.

The corporate elite contribute to nearly all candidates, regardless of party affiliation. They give in election years, and in non-voting years. No matter who wins, they win.

The interests of multinational corporations often diverge from those of individuals and communities. This leaves "the people" out spent and under-represented—if represented at all—in modern politics.  Therefore, it does not matter what your particular interest is; if your interests oppose those of the corporate elite, you lose.

The super-wealthy and corporate lawyers argue that the ability to spend unlimited sums of money on political campaigns is equal to free speech and, therefore, is vital to democracy. If that is true, then multinationals are in the front row of the auditorium with a bullhorn, while low- and middle-income folks are bound and gagged in the 1,000th row.

We desperately need political models which do not rely on money to elect candidates. Fortunately, the internet offers huge hope for the future. Internet-based campaigning allows candidates to reach potentially millions of voters for a fraction of the cost of direct mail and 30-second television commercials, while offering the depth of content which leads to worthwhile public debate.

• Ideas for low-cost, workable, elections reform
• Touch-screen voting
• Model Constitution site