Friday, August 25, 2017

Retain public financing of election campaigns

Read the Tampa Bay Times and St. Augustine Record editorials, below. I think the Times is right and the Record is wrong (as is most often the case).

After October 2 (Liberation Day, when dead-hand MORRIS COMMUNICATIONS control ends and GateHouse takes over), I reckon that some of the St. Augustine Record's dubious, fascistic editorial stances will change. Yes!


Editorial: Don't kill Florida's public campaign financing
Friday, August 25, 2017 3:37pm
Tampa Bay Times

House Speaker Richard Corcoran wants the Constitution Revision Commission to put an amendment on the 2018 ballot to try to repeal the public campaign financing program.

With huge checks from special interests flowing into political committees, Florida needs significant campaign finance reform to amplify the voices of voters who have less to spend. Yet House Speaker Richard Corcoran wants to go in the opposite direction and kill the state's modest program that uses public money to match small contributions to statewide candidates. It's a cynical attempt by a powerful Tallahassee insider to exploit access to big money and further silence the voices of Floridians who can't afford to give thousands of dollars to their favorite candidate.

Voters have spoken clearly in support of public campaign financing. The state already had a program before voters approved a constitutional amendment in 1998 that was placed on the ballot by the last Constitution Revision Commission and required the Legislature to fund the program for statewide candidates. In 2010, a constitutional amendment to kill it failed to get the required 60 percent voter approval. And now Corcoran wants the Constitution Revision Commission to put another amendment on the 2018 ballot to try to repeal it. The voters' answer should remain the same.

The concept is simple. The public campaign financing law enables candidates for governor and Cabinet to receive public matching money for contributions of $250 or less if they voluntarily agree to spending limits. The idea is to encourage candidates to reach out to broader groups of voters and to level the playing field just a bit for candidates who aren't independently wealthy or don't have connections to lobbyists. It also amplifies the voices of voters who can make a modest contribution to their favorite candidate. In an era of unlimited contributions to political committees, it's a very modest program.

In fact, Florida spent just $4.4 million on public campaign financing in 2014, a drop in the bucket compared to the state budget that now stands at $82 billion. Corcoran argues the state could better spend the money on public education and other priorities. Yet the Land O'Lakes Republican also supports Gov. Rick Scott's proposed constitutional amendment to make it harder for the Legislature to approve any tax increases. So Corcoran's concern about finding enough money for Florida to adequately meet its needs rings a bit hollow.

It's no surprise Scott supports Corcoran's amendment to repeal public campaign financing. Scott went to federal court to kill a key part of the law in 2010, which enabled candidates who agreed to limit spending to receive a dollar in public matching money for every dollar that their opponents exceeded the spending cap. That enabled Scott to buy the election with $70 million of his own money without fear his opponents could come close to matching his spending.

If Scott and Corcoran were genuinely interested in campaign finance reform, they would enhance public campaign financing rather than try to kill it. They would look for ways to rein in political committees. And the St. Petersburg City Council, which is expected next week to consider a ban on political committees in city elections, would not be wading into an issue that should be decided by state lawmakers.

The Constitution Revision Commission should not blindly follow Scott and Corcoran and put an amendment on the ballot to repeal public campaign financing. If it does, voters have demonstrated they are more than capable of rejecting this bad idea themselves.

Editorial: Don't kill Florida's public campaign financing 08/25/17 [Last modified: Friday, August 25, 2017 3:30pm]

----

Posted August 26, 2017 03:38 pm
Time to end public campaign funding

St. Augustine Record editorial

Agreeing with House Speaker Richard Corcoran is generally uncharted territory for us, but here we go.

Corcoran is asking the Constitutional Revision Committee to repeal an earlier constitutional amendment allowing public financing of campaigns. State voters passed it in 1998 with 64 percent of the vote.

Generally, the idea that was pitched was public financing would give the little guy a chance in an election. Later, we were told, that the election could become more about issues than money.

Let’s get this out upfront.

If it occurs to you that the entrenched candidates already get all the money they can spend from special interests, you’re right. And if it further occurs to you that the state money would be much more important to challengers than incumbents, right again.

So the impetus of this effort is more likely to be turning off the campaign dollar spigot for challengers than saving tax money.

By Florida statute an applicant must not be running unopposed and agree to limit campaign spending in order to apply for state money.

Let’s admit that the notion of public financing might be a good one. But, as always, the devil is in the details.

By statute, and in order to receive public funding of a campaign, an applicant for governor for instance, must raise $150,000 on his own.

Now, if you could raise $150,000 to enter a race, you probably wouldn’t need public financing. So the David and Goliath metaphor seems a little stretched here.

As far as limiting campaign spending, the ceiling for a gubernatorial candidate is $25,067,768. As if that’s not sufficient, a candidate receiving public financing may exceed the limit to the extent that an opponent not receiving public funding does. As a point of reference, Gov. Rick Scott dumped $100 million into his 2014 campaign.

The News Service of Florida reports that in 2010, more than $6 million in public tax money was used to finance only gubernatorial and Cabinet seats.

That’s $6 million that might have ended up in public schools. (But, more likely today, in charter schools, thanks to a large degree, to Richard Corcoran.)

Corcoran was quoted by the Florida News Service as calling public campaign financing, “a gross waste of taxpayer money, and is nothing more than welfare for candidates.” And, considering the statutory ceilings on spending and the minimum sum for receiving public money, it is.

There’s a flip side to this coin, as well, that we believe makes ending public campaign financing at least prudent.

That’s the simple truth that , as a taxpayer who’s doing the financing, you have no say in whom you’re supporting. Democrats might be funding a Republican candidate and vice-versa.

Women might be supporting a misogynist. Christians might be bankrolling an atheist.

The cons outweigh (sic) the pros, which might work in Never-Never Land, but are more a laugh in Tallahassee.


No comments: