Florida 2010: A triumph of private election financing?

Remember a few weeks ago when Robyn Blumner was wringing her hands over the pernicious influence of private fortunes in Florida politics?

Today, the day before Florida's primary election, the relatively cash poor campaigns of Kendrick Meek and Bill McCollum stand poised to knock off privately-funded powerhouses Jeff Greene and Rick Scott, respectively.

How did that happen, considering that Meek and McCollum are essentially unexciting candidates for office during a year ripe for outsider challenges?

In a word (using a Bidenesque count), issues matter.

OK, so the critical issue in both cases was the fact that both Greene and Scott carry huge negatives.  Voters figured that out and gravitated toward the candidate with the best chance to win, at least in sufficient numbers to give Meek and McCollum an advantage in the polls headed into Tuesday.

Perhaps the St. Petersburg Times gives itself some credit for editorializing against the big-spending candidates.  But the impact of those editorials was modest at best and almost certainly not the deciding factor.  The people figured it out.  And that's important.

Why is it important?  Because our electoral system depends on the voters making rational decisions.  And that ought to include voting for a rich candidate who comes out of nowhere if the voters believe that candidate best represents their interests.  The day public financing is necessary to keep voters from voting non-
rationally is the day we might as well let a single party pick the one candidate voters are allowed to select.

Greene and Scott haven't lost yet.  But their names are very close to being added to the long list of failed self-financed candidates.  Elections can't be bought with money alone.  If a candidate has an attractive message then there's an opportunity to fund the campaign without initial public support, however.  That's it.