As Connecticut approaches its first election cycle with Clean Elections there's discussion about the safeguards put in place against fraud, and news on court challenges to the law made on the basis of its rules for third party candidates.First, from the Hartford Business Journal this guest piece by Beth Rotman, the director of the Public Campaign Financing section of the State Election Enforcement Commission who describes the many measures, including a thorough auditing process, put in place to guard against fraud and misuse of funds within the Clean Elections program: The goals for the program — the broadest and most widely sweeping public financing program in the country — are lofty and laudable: leveling the political playing field, enhancing competition in elections, limiting exorbitant campaign spending, and separating the political process from special interests, most notably by banning campaign contributions from lobbyists, state contractors and political action committees. To achieve these goals, the agency must use the carrot of education to inform candidates and their campaign treasurers about the requirements of the program and prevent violations, while wielding the stick of enforcement to identify and punish violators. Genghis Conn over at Connecticut Local Politics talks about a judge's dismissal of part of a case against the Clean Elections law, which argued that it put an undue burden on third party candidates in terms of the standards to qualify for public funds. While consideration should be given to the importance of expanding the political dialogue beyond the two-party system when crafting Clean Elections programs, equal consideration must be given to allocating public funds to only those candidates who demonstrate broad public support. It's a tough balance, but the Clean Elections option is still a better bet for independent and third party candidates than is a traditional private financing model where the two major parties operate huge fundraising machines.