TO: Interested Journalists and Editorial Board Writers

FR: Fair Elections Coalition (Brennan Center for Justice, Common Cause, Public Campaign, Public Citizen, U.S. PIRG, Democracy Matters)

RE: Overhaul of campaign fundraising takes step forward

 

Donors from vested interests, 33,000 lobbyists in our nation's capital, and wealthy individuals helped to fuel a record amount of funds raised and spent for the 2006 election. The 2008 races are already looking like they will shatter those records. The election brought a change in leadership, but will it bring a change to what was dubbed the "culture of corruption" in Congress?

 

On Wednesday, June 20^th, Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) will speak to the Senate Rules Committee about the Fair Elections Now Act (FENA), legislation that would change the pay-to-play system that Reps. William Jefferson, Tom DeLay, and Bob Ney all exploited. As detailed below, this is the first time that such a sweeping reform has been introduced in either chamber with bipartisan support.

 

On this occasion, we hope that you will editorialize in support of the Fair Elections Now Act to level the political playing field, curtail the corrupting influence of campaign contributions, and bring an end to the campaign money chase.

 

Background

 

With campaign costs spiraling out of control, big money donors dominating the political process, and a public increasingly disillusioned with our elected officials, the Fair Elections Now Act would enhance the power of small donors and make elections about voters, not special interest donors. A broad range of groups representing more than 60 million people - including the AFL-CIO, the NAACP, the League of Women Voters, the Dolores Huerta Foundation, the National Council of Churches and others - have announced their support of the legislation. In addition, the bill is co-sponsored by Senators Barbara Boxer, (D-CA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tom Carper (D-DE), Russ Feingold (D-WI), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), and Barack Obama (D-IL).

 

The legislation is based on the successful Clean Elections programs in Arizona, Maine, and five other states and two localities that provide full public financing to candidates to run competitive campaigns once they qualify by collecting a set number of small contributions-usually $5. Once qualified, candidates agree to forgo all private fundraising and to abide by strict spending limits. For a summary of the technical aspects of the Fair Elections Now Act visit http://www.publicampaign.org/fair-elections-now-summary.

 

The Hearing

 

The Fair Elections Now Act introduced in March 2007 by Sens. Durbin and Specter became the first full public financing legislation introduced in either chamber of Congress with bipartisan support. The last time Congress considered a public financing proposal was 1992.

 

The hearing in the Senate Rules Committee on June 20^th marks the first hearing on full public financing of congressional elections in more than a decade. The hearing will begin with testimony by both Sens. Durbin and Specter about the need for public financing. Public Campaign President Nick Nyhart, a leading expert on public financing of elections, will then testify about the problem of money in the political process, the need for public financing, and stories of similar successful systems in the seven states and two cities where they are in place. Drawing on his experience as a former Senator, Warren Rudman (R-NH) will provide testimony on the need for the Fair Elections Now Act.

 

Also on the panel in support of the Fair Elections Now Act will be former Stride Rite CEO and major political donor Arnold Hiatt. Hiatt will talk about his role as a donor and his belief that the system needs to change. Former Federal Elections Commission Chairman Scott Thomas will talk about the skyrocketing costs of television advertisements and their role in increasing the fundraising that candidates must perform to be seen as viable candidates.

 

High Cost of Campaigning

 

The cost of campaigning has reached record heights. While second quarter fundraising results for the presidential race won't be officially released until mid-July, more than $150 million has already been raised for the 2008 presidential contest, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.[1]

 

Among congressional candidates, those hoping to win re-election must start to fundraise for their next campaign even before they are sworn into office. The high cost of political advertising feeds the fundraising frenzy. In the 2006 elections alone, some $2 billion was spent on political advertising.[2]

 

The Fair Elections Now Act addresses the problem of the high cost of campaigning by setting reasonable spending limits for qualified participating candidates. As with Clean Elections programs in the states, participating candidates would be required to show their viability by raising a set number of qualifying contributions. Candidates would then be eligible for a public grant and media vouchers provided they agree to abide by strict spending limits and to accept no more private contributions.

 

Enhancing the Power of Small Donors

 

The Fair Elections Now Act would enhance the power of small donors since candidates would be relying on $5 contributions from a set number of citizens within their states. In Arizona, where Clean Elections has been available to candidates since 2000, small donors have played a large role in deciding who gets to run for office. The number of donors to the gubernatorial campaigns has increased more than three-fold from 1998, when elections were privately financed, to 2002, when the public financing option was available. The $5 qualifying contributions collected by gubernatorial candidates in 2002 came from a more geographically and economically diverse group of donors than did the private contributions to candidates who did not participate in the Clean Elections program.[3]

 

A Practical, Proven Reform

 

The state programs that the Fair Elections Now Act is based on - known as Clean Elections, Voter-Owned Elections, or Fair Elections - are law for all or some offices in seven states and two cities. The 2006 elections showed that the systems that are up and running - in Arizona, Maine, North Carolina, and Portland, Oregon - are popular and working well. In total, more than 200 candidates have won state offices using a Clean Elections system. These new office holders include Democrats and Republicans, incumbents and challengers, women, and a diverse group of races and ethnicities. In Maine, 84 percent of the current Legislature was elected using Clean Elections. In Arizona, nine of 11 statewide elected officials ran and won under Clean Elections, including Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano. Other states and localities with such programs for at least some races include Connecticut, New Jersey, New Mexico, Vermont, and Albuquerque, New Mexico.

 

The wealth primary is already in full swing for 2008. While scandal provides fodder for newspapers and bloggers, outside the beltway it only fuels the cynicism and distrust voters hold for the government. Members of Congress continually bemoan the time they must spend raising money. Fair Elections would change that. It is time to consider bringing Fair Elections financing to congressional campaigns.

 

# # #

 

 

---

[1] http://opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008

[2] George Winslow, "Bullish Ad Forecast in Changing Landscape," Multichannel News, November 27, 2006, p. 22.

[3] "Reclaiming Democracy in America: How Clean Elections is Expanding the Universe of Campaign Contributors," Arizona Clean Elections Institute, http://azclean.org/documents/98-02ZipStudywithgraphs.pdf.