Philadelphia call for Clean Elections
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 05:43:25 PM EST
Adam Bonin writes in the Philadelphia Inquirer about the need, despite a hostile Supreme Court, for public funding systems throughout the country. The majority's rationale rested on the notion that leveling electoral opportunities for less-wealthy candidates was not a legitimate government objective. That's a shame, because the smalldonor revolution that propelled Obama's presidential campaign has not yet reached the state or local levels.
To reform this system, states such as Arizona, Connecticut and Maine have implemented innovative methods to allow candidates to receive a public grant that covers campaign costs in exchange for forgoing private fund-raising.
In order to ensure a fair contest, candidates participating in the system can receive additional grants if their non-participating rivals or outside groups supporting them end up spending funds in excess of the public grant.
The result: a legislature that is more economically diverse than one that proceeded it - with diner waitresses and social workers now joining chambers once reserved for the well-connected - and one that is not beholden to special interests or entrenched wealth. More on that topic: the New York Times praised the high participation from candidates in the newly-created Connecticut public funding system, which goes into effect this year. Over 65% of candidates have opted in, and more may join them -- only 10 out of over 300 candidates have said they won't be running publicly-funded. Public financing encourages good governance as well as competition. Government is cleaner when lawmakers are not beholden to special interests and are free to spend their energy meeting the needs of the people who matter -- those who elected them.
Connecticut, which became known as "Corrupticut" after the recent scandals, can only benefit from this new system.
Lunsford should sign Voters First Pledge
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 09:24:32 AM EST
Bruce Lunsford, Democratic Senate candidate from Kentucky, wrote himself a $1 million check the day after the Supreme Court struck down the so-called Millionaire's Amendment of BCRA.
That's the way the system works -- kinda rotten for average non-wealthy folks, which is most of us, but that's the way it is. For now.
Lunsford should make clear that he's not about keeping it that way, with the Senate resembling an elite country club, and he should sign the Voters First Pledge in support of public financing for Congress. A tip of the cap to our friends at Campaign Money Watch for sending Lunsford a letter telling him to do so.
Back to bundling
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Thu Jun 26, 2008 at 09:58:09 AM EST
The New York Times calls out the Obama campaign's recent pursuit of Hillary Clinton's biggest bundlers as a demonstration that while the small donor surge is terrific, it does not replace public financing in large part because it means that lots of cash is coming from wealthy donors, too. Senator Obama is scheduled to meet Thursday with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and her platinum card money raisers. One group specialized in amassing $250,000 packages for the campaign, while another excelled at hitting $1 million jackpots. The voters should not be fooled. They must demand that both candidates explain how they will reform the campaign-finance system so no future candidate has any excuse for going into hock to the bundlers and their special-interest donors. What we've been saying all along. Update: Worth noting that last week USA Today criticized Obama's decision to opt out of public funding, but also published Obama's response in which he said, "The decision not to participate in the public financing system wasn't an easy one — especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections," and "I am firmly committed to reforming the system as president, so that it's viable in today's campaign climate." That's great, but he needs to keep saying that, not just in one response column but in campaigning throughout the country. Common Cause Weekly Update - June 11, 2008
Common Cause continues its efforts to hold power accountable. Abuse of Power: Forging the Path to Recovery Common Cause hosted a distinguished panel on June 10 to discuss the widespread abuse of power engaged in by the current Administration. The Administration has disregarded the rule of law through over-broad assertions of executive power, abuse of signing statements, and policies that arguably flout the Constitution regarding interrogation, detention, and intelligence gathering. The Congress has repeatedly failed to perform its constitutionally mandated oversight duties in each of these areas. The panelists were charged with examining these disturbing trends and with considering how best to restore the constitutional constraints that have served our country well since its inception.
Discomfort
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 09:39:05 AM EST
With Barack Obama's decision to restrict both his campaign and the DNC from taking PAC's and lobbyists' contributions, he's indicated a willingness to change the campaign fundraising dynamic. That's an exciting step for someone on such a large stage as the presidential election -- and we can only hope that it portends a strong commitment to continuing to reform the system if he's elected.
But it's complicating affairs for other Democrats who feel they need to continue taking contributions from any source in order to afford to run a modern-day congressional campaign (h/t OpenLeft):
Feinstein is key
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 04:01:39 PM EST
Rob Arnow posts on Sen. Feinstein and the Fair Elections Now Act at the California Progress Report. Right here in California, we have a tremendous opportunity, and responsibility, to affect the outcome of this bill. The bill begins its journey in the Rules and Administration Committee in the Senate, of which Dianne Feinstein is the Chair. She hasn't taken a position yet, and the opinions of other elected officials, activists, businesspeople, and regular citizens will be very important to her in how she comes down on the issue. All over the map: Arizona small donor study
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:11:58 PM EST
What kind of impact does Clean Elections have on the participants in our democracy? A big one -- even greater than what we previously knew, thanks to Public Campaign's new study out this week, " All Over the Map: Small Donors Bring Diversity to Arizona's Elections." They looked at the donors in statewide races covered by the state-level Clean Elections program in Arizona and compared them to the donors in federal races for Senate, which have the same statewide electorate but currently have no public funding or Clean Elections option.
The difference is striking: from race and ethnicity to economic and geographic levels, the Clean Elections donors represent a much wider and more representative mix of citizens. Again, the executive summary is here. A five point plan
By Josh Zaharoff
Posted on Tue May 27, 2008 at 10:38:07 AM EST
USA Today has an "Improving Elections" editorial piece up that includes five sensible recommendations for a better presidential campaign, including paper records of votes cast on electronic voting machines, monitoring and curtailing the influence of 527s and other independent soft money groups, and taking public financing.
While they won't all be easy, they get it right in terms of making the election a boost for democracy and tackling important issues, rather than about trivialities and wealthy interests.
|
Common Blog
