We like seeing positive press coverage for Clean Elections, and when that coverage is from the New York Times, so much the better. The Times writes in favor of Connecticut's new Clean Elections program which, in its first year, is seeing participation rates in excess of 70%, a higher number of contested primaries, and overall positive response from candidates. Connecticut's "Corrupticut" nickname may be on the way out thanks to this Clean Elections program which allows candidates for the legislature to run without having to collect big donations: The rest of the country will be watching to see how well the system works. Though not perfect, it’s a great improvement over the status quo. Public financing has invigorated democracy in New York City and states like Arizona and Maine. In Connecticut, candidates must first obtain a minimum number of $5 donations in private money from district voters before qualifying for public money. They must also agree to limit spending, and they may not accept donations from state contractors or lobbyists. To keep the playing field level, larger grants are available to candidates whose opponents refuse public financing.[ . . .] 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.