Reasons to Support Public Financing

Overview: While overall campaign costs continue to skyrocket and we approach the first $1 billion presidential race, something quite different is unfolding in the states that have enacted Clean Money/Clean Elections (CE) systems: more candidates than ever are running for office with a campaign finance system that levels the playing field and promotes fairness within our democracy. And, luckily for the rest of us, the system is spreading.

1. Maine and Arizona are leading the way:

In Maine, nearly 80% of the candidates for state legislature are running clean.

In Arizona, almost 60% of the candidates for state house and close to 40% for state senate are running clean.

Six out of the seven statewide candidates for Arizona’s Corporation Commission (including all the Democrats and Republicans) are running clean.

In both states, participation rates are up from 2002.

Participation cuts across party lines: in Maine 87% of the Democrats and 73% of the Republicans are running clean; in Arizona, 65% of the Democrats and 51% of the Republicans are running clean.

Voter choices are being expanded, too: in Maine 92% of the house races and 91% of the senate races will include at least one CE participant. In Arizona, 83% of the house races and 50% of the senate races will include at least one CE participant.

In Maine, the number of contested primaries rose to 39, up from 31 in 2002 and 25 in 2000. All but two of those included at least one CE candidate.

2. New Clean Elections states are coming on line:

In North Carolina, twelve of sixteen candidates for state Supreme Court and Appellate Court are currently running with full public financing, taking advantage of the state’s new Judicial Campaign Reform Act, passed by the legislature in 2002. North Carolina’s new system is especially notable in contrast to the exploding cost of judicial campaigns elsewhere in the country.

In New Jersey, the state legislature became the first in the country to enact full public financing for legislative races when it voted, this past June, to create a "Fair and Clean Elections Pilot Program." The pilot program will be in place in two legislative districts for the November 2005 general election for Assembly.

In Vermont, where candidates for governor and lieutenant governor can qualify for full public financing, but cannot receive matching funds if they are outspent by a non-participating candidate, caps on all candidates’ spending were struck down in court. However, the 2^nd Circuit Court of Appeals has said the limits may be constitutional—an issue that will likely ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court. One candidate is currently running "clean"—a Progressive party candidate for Lieutenant Governor.

In New Mexico, candidates for the Public Regulation Commission, a statewide body that oversees corporations and utilities, will be able to seek full public financing for their campaigns starting with the 2005-06 election cycle.

3. Future state victories are not far off:

In Connecticut, the shake-up created by the resignation of the scandal-plagued Republican Governor (and Clean Elections foe), more sympathetic advocates moved up to leadership positions in the legislature. The coalition of seasoned reform advocates in Connecticut is poised to take advantage of these new developments in the 2005 session.

In Hawaii, for the first time, both chambers of the legislature voted in favor of public financing of elections, though the bill stalled in conference and never reached the governor’s desk. The chance of success in the next session has been greatly increased.

In Maryland, 2004 saw the release of the Stenberg Study Commission report, which recommends public financing as the best campaign finance reform option for statewide and legislative offices. Blue ribbon study commissions are often a precursor to policy change in Maryland.

California and West Virginia also took their first steps in new legislative campaigns and advocates there were successful in getting their bills debated and passed out of key committees. In doing so, Clean Money reformers attracted increased media coverage and stepped up public education outreach and awareness.

Activists are also hard at work in Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Nevada, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

For more information, contact Public Campaign at 202-293-0222 or visit our website at http://www.publicampaign.org/pressroom/talkingpoints.htm