If you’re upset with the status quo of Massachusetts politics, voting yes on Question 3 might feel good. It offers what seems like a simple fix for a system that feels unresponsive and unhelpful. I agree with much of what Question 3’s proponents say is wrong with the MA state government and electoral system.

Despite that, I strongly urge you to vote against it. Their solution is even worse than what we already have.

The problem is rooted in a few things: our current voting system, the cost of running a political campaign (and the advantage of having lots of cash), and our campaign finance laws.

Running a political campaign is expensive. Voter outreach and the advertising necessary to get name recognition for your race is expensive. Wealthy people, or people who curry favor with wealthy donors and super PACs (or better yet, wealthy people who curry favor with wealthy donors and super PACs) are in a much better position to get the word out about their candidacy, and thereby get votes. But no matter how big a problem the money is, and how much it skews our current political environment—which is a lot, by the way—our voting system remains a large enough problem that Question 3 will fix nothing. Actually, Question 3 will only make things worse.

I’ll give you some examples.