Cleaning up is hard to do
By Kim Hynes
Posted on Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 02:54:15 PM EST
When Connecticut Common Cause helped to get the Citizens Elections Program passed in Connecticut, we always expected enemies of clean election reform to try and raid the fund. What we didn't expect to see was Leaders who helped pass the reform vote to use the fund as their own personal ATM machine. Yet last night law makers voted overwhelmingly to raid $5 million from the Citizen Elections Fund to help address the looming budget crisis here.
There were other options. $25 million in unclaimed bottle deposits could have been claimed instead. However, lobbyists for the beverage companies moved quickly to influence legislators and save the $25 million to line the pockets of the companies they represent. Instead, they took the untainted Citizen Election Funds that are designed to clean up Connecticut elections.
While the $5 million taken from the Citizens Election Fund represents 0.27% of the overall $18.4 billion budget, it is a major hit for the Citizen Elections Program itself. This program was created in order to remove the taint of corruption from Connecticut politics and restore public trust in their elected officials. How can trust be restored when Leaders who helped pass this program vote to raid it at the first opportunity?
As the old saying goes . . . if you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
The Cable TV Industry: Hardwiring Influence in New York State
By Chris Keeley
Posted on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 05:35:46 PM EST
Common Cause New York this morning released a new report titled, "The Cable TV Industry: Hardwiring Influence." The report brings together New York State lobbying and campaign finance data for the first time to demonstrate how the cable television industry has used its financial resources to fight for industry self-interest at the expense of New York cable subscribers, who Common Cause deems to be the ultimate "Loser" in the report. Hardwiring Influence (and its additional background) documents the veritable "army" of lobbyists employed by the cable TV industry, which paid more than $24 million for these lobbying efforts in recent years, as well as $4.3 million in campaign contributions made to politicians, their political parties, and party slush funds. Connecticut's public financing program already making big waves
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Thu Oct 23, 2008 at 07:33:27 PM EST
Small donors and public funding are powering 75% of the candidates running for state legislature in Connecticut this year. It's the first year of the state's new Citizens' Elections Program, and that's a fantastic start. The New York Times took note of this exciting progress today: The big story about public financing of campaigns nationally has been Barack Obama's decision to opt out of the national system. But what's unfolding in Connecticut may end up being far more influential. What's unfolding? Three-quarters of the candidates are not relying on wealthy donors and special interest money to run for office. They're raising small contributions, and those contributions are amplified by public funds to give them enough to run a competitive race -- which means elected officials who aren't accountable to wealthy campaign donors but to regular voters and small donors.
Connecticut's initial success is remarkable; the Times acknowledges, "Connecticut's initial experience has exceeded the expectations of even its most enthusiastic supporters." Yet the media have been largely missing or distorting this demand for reform around the country.
Himes, Shays agree on support for public financing
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Mon Oct 20, 2008 at 04:51:13 PM EST
In a closely contested race in Connecticut, incumbent Rep. Chris Shays (R) and challenger Jim Himes (D) agreed yesterday that changing the way we pay for our elections is critical: During that rare light moment, they agreed that public financing needs to be adopted for congressional campaigns to prevent the proliferation of lobbyists, political action committees and special interests who this year are making Connecticut's tight 4th District race one of the most-expensive in the country. Perhaps it has something to do with the dramatic initial success of the Connecticut Citizens Elections public financing program, which began this year. In addition, last week, we sent a letter to every congressional candidate and asked them to sign the Voters First Pledge. As the nation faces its worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, now is the time for bold reforms to both the financial and political systems. Wall Street and powerful financial interests should not be funding campaigns for Congress if we want a political system that truly works for the American people.
The time is long overdue for members of Congress to do what the majority of Americans now know they should do: Make genuine reform of campaign finance a top legislative priority in 2009. Himes and Shays need to make it official that they're on board -- you can see the signers here -- but it's great that this important reform issue entered their debate in its final weeks. Connecting... the... dots.
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 07:00:31 PM EST
Our friends at the Brennan Center put it succinctly in a piece on The Hill's blog today: Wall Street routinely doles out large campaign contributions to members of Congress. In the current election cycle, the financial services sector (which includes insurance and real sector), contributed more money to candidates for Congress, the presidency and political parties than did any other sector, totaling $339.6 million from 2007 through today. Both chambers' banking committees also benefit handsomely. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, PACs and employees of the securities and investment industry are the second largest source of cash for members of the Senate Banking committee. During the 2008 election cycle, these contributors raised $11.7 million for the 21 members of that Committee. Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn) received about $4.3 million since 2003, or half of all contributions to his campaign coffers.
Does campaign cash influence legislation and regulation? When Congress last debated regulation (or rather, de-regulation) of the financial industry in 1999, a study by the Center for Responsive Politics showed that members of Congress who supported the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act received twice as much money from commercial banks, investment banks, and insurance companies as those who opposed the measure. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was the product of many years of lobbying by the financial industry and allowed for the loosening of bank regulations that had been in place since the Great Depression. Gutting regulations that had been in place since the Great Depression, leading to a financial crisis that has us moving closer to a repeat of the Great Depression, all because of a pesky little privately-funded campaign system in which Wall Street used its financial might to keep Congress quiet.
When public attention shifts beyond the bailout to the longer term concern of our economy -- and who makes the decisions and regulations going forward -- we need to make sure we fix our political system so it's not a money game that continues to reward the wealthiest interests at the expense of the rest of us. Here's how: Just last week, the Fair Elections Now Act, which would establish a system of voluntary public financing for Congressional elections, was introduced with bi-partisan support in the House. Last year, Senators Durbin (D-Ill.) and Specter (R-Pa.) introduced the Senate version of the Fair Elections Now Act, which would create a voluntary public financing system for Senate candidates. With the introduction of its House counterpart this week by Representatives Larson (D-Conn.) and Jones (R-N.C.) (both from Clean Elections states), lawmakers are presented with a bipartisan, bicameral effort to undertake serious and lasting structural reform. Public financing would eliminate the perils of special interest cash by establishing strict spending limits, enabling small donors and greatly increasing the power of ordinary voters to hold Congress accountable.
A corrupt system soldiers on
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 05:49:14 PM EST
The LA Times covers the story behind the bailout story today: how the major Wall Street financial institutions spent over $1 billion (that's billion with a 'b') on Washington lobbying and campaign contributions in just the last six years, which not only pushed Congress to treat them with kid gloves--i.e. lax regulation, friendly policies--but is also allowing them to continue pushing for their own best interests in the massive bailout package.
The subheadline says it all: Firms have given lavishly to both parties in Congress. That could help them get the language they want in the bill - as well as block provisions such as homeowner assistance.
That's our political system, rife with corrupting big money, soldiering on to favor the wealthy and powerful industries even in the most dire circumstances. There's no better example of why public financing of campaigns would go a long way towards putting the power back into the hands of the people and allow lawmakers to serve the public interest, not the financial services industry's interest.
Could this happen again? Well, we had the S&L crisis twenty years ago, but apparently that lesson wasn't enough to overcome the campaign cash of Wall Street. Either we change the way we finance our elections in this country or... well, you know the old saying, the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result. UPDATE (Wednesday): And for a further analysis, see our report out today, "Ask Yourself Why... They Didn't See This Coming."
The one good investment
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 01:25:30 PM EST
USA Today points out what was perhaps the only good investment in this whole economic mess: the banking industry's $170 million to lobby Washington and fund lawmakers' political campaigns over two decades, which is now paying off with a multi-hundred billion dollar taxpayer bailout of Wall Street. Millennials Mobilize to Address Money In Politics
By Ian Storrar
Posted on Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 03:15:10 PM EST
www.mobilize.org
Thanks to sponsorship by the Sunlight Foundation and Common Cause, Mobilize.org is bringing Millennials together to address the critical issue of Money In Politics. On September 19-21, 2008, our organization will be holding our national summit on Money in Politics, the Democracy 2.0 Entrepreneur Grant Summit. We are looking for Millennials to come and discuss the issue and then propose grassroots solutions that make use of Web 2.0 tools such as texting, Facebook, Twitter, wikis, mash-ups and blogging.
The Money in Politics Grant Summit presents members of the Millennial Generation with the opportunity to identify a need for change at the local, state, or national level for clean elections practices and develop an innovative idea. Participation is FREE. While the summit focuses on the ideas and participation of the Millennial entrepreneurs, we are excited to welcome keynote speakers including Nancy Watzman ( Sunlight Foundation) and Sam Rasoul ( Change Congress Pledge Candidate for U.S. Rep. VA-6). Other speakers will be announced when they are confirmed.
|
Common Blog
