New Jersey passed a pilot project to enact voluntary, full public funding of campaigns in three state Senate districts, and those candidates have already begun raising small contributions and successfully qualifying for public funding. The Times of Trenton rightly calls out naysayers in a recent editorial:
Critics are claiming that public funding of the campaigns in these districts is a waste of taxpayer money, favors the incumbents (that's one that doesn't add up) and the districts chosen don't have competitive races. It appears that, before the campaigns heat up in the 37th, 24th, and our own 14th legislative districts, the naysayers are mounting an effort to kill Clean Elections once and for all.
They couldn't be more wrong. If anything, the Clean Elections project should be expanded to more districts in the future. And if reform-minded lawmakers sincerely want to get at the problems of influence-peddling and big-spending private contributors, Clean Elections should be extended to the primaries -- that's where the real work of leveling the political playing field needs to take place.
They're right that the program should be expanded, and especially that it should include primary race funding as well as general. But they're also on the mark about the critics, who have little evidence to challenge the system and represent a small minority of the public.
The paper goes on to highlight the way that Clean Elections-style programs improve on the typical campaign model:
Qualifying is the key, and it's not a cakewalk. To be eligible for public funding by Clean Elections rules, candidates must collect 800 $10 donations. In the 14th, all of the candidates qualified, which means that they went out, met a lot of people in their district and persuaded them to contribute. That strikes us as an improvement over special-interest groups that write fat checks for candidates' campaigns with the implied agreement that they and their pet causes won't be forgotten once the candidate is elected.
New Jersey is early in the Clean Elections experiment. Still, it can learn from the experience of other states where Clean Elections have been a reality for several election cycles. Studies show that in Maine and Arizona, two Clean Elections states, there are now fewer uncontested elections and more women and minorities running for office.
You are not logged in.
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account just by filling out the form below. It's quick and free.
