Unintended Consequences

I admire Roddy Jones, John Prestage and the 800 business and civic leaders they say have “responded to an invitation from former U.S. Sen. Robert Morgan and Democracy North Carolina to form Campaign Donors for Campaign Reform.”
 
In their op-ed “Urgent need for clean elections” in today’s N&O, they say that today’s “campaign financing system…is broken and unsustainable.”
 
They write:
 
“Together, we have endorsed a new “voter-owned” approach to campaign financing: Offer qualified candidates a set amount of public campaign money if they agree to limit their spending and fundraising and if they demonstrate broad support among ordinary voters.”
 
Their intentions are admirable. The consequences could be disastrous.
 
Let’s say we go to public financing for Governor. Let’s say the spending limit is $1 million. Or more.
 
To start with, voters will hear about as much from those candidates as you do today from candidates for a judgeship or Insurance Commissioner.
 
Even worse, suppose a business owner – on the left or the right – decides to spend corporate money on TV ads in the race. Five million dollars, maybe. Or more. Enough to overwhelm what the candidates spend.
 
They can do that, remember, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court.
 
Is that the campaign-finance system we want?
 
Posted in ,
Avatar photo

Gary Pearce

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

Unintended Consequences

I admire Roddy Jones, John Prestage and the 800 business and civic leaders they say have “responded to an invitation from former U.S. Sen. Robert Morgan and Democracy North Carolina to form Campaign Donors for Campaign Reform.”
 
In their op-ed “Urgent need for clean elections” in today’s N&O, they say that today’s “campaign financing system…is broken and unsustainable.”
 
They write:
 
“Together, we have endorsed a new “voter-owned” approach to campaign financing: Offer qualified candidates a set amount of public campaign money if they agree to limit their spending and fundraising and if they demonstrate broad support among ordinary voters.”
 
Their intentions are admirable. The consequences could be disastrous.
 
Let’s say we go to public financing for Governor. Let’s say the spending limit is $1 million. Or more.
 
To start with, voters will hear about as much from those candidates as you do today from candidates for a judgeship or Insurance Commissioner.
 
Even worse, suppose a business owner – on the left or the right – decides to spend corporate money on TV ads in the race. Five million dollars, maybe. Or more. Enough to overwhelm what the candidates spend.
 
They can do that, remember, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court.
 
Is that the campaign-finance system we want?
 
Posted in ,
Avatar photo

Gary Pearce

Categories

Archives