Patrick Gensel/Flickr
By John Lawrence
Wouldn’t it be nice if money didn’t influence who gets elected and what they do after they get elected? The Clean Elections Initiative aims to get money out of politics so that one vote will truly equal one vote like it’s supposed to in a democracy. Right now money controls elections and lobbyists have too much influence over elected officials which are in turn dependent on rich donors for their campaign funds.
The San Diego Clean Elections Initiative is being sponsored by Neighborhoods for Clean Elections, a grass roots coalition that is aiming to place the Clean Elections Initiative on the 2016 ballot. The initiative, which is also supported by Common Cause, will provide public funding for candidates for mayor and City Council who agree to a Clean Elections Pledge: The pledge requires that they refrain from soliciting any campaign contributions from private sources and that they further agree to refrain from spending any of their own money for their campaign.
Voters in Maine, Arizona, Connecticut and Albuquerque, NM already have Clean Elections. Why not here in San Diego?
We know that neighborhoods are getting shorted while Big Money interests like developers and hoteliers get what they want from City Hall. They even get what they want despite City Hall.
When the City Council came up with a plan to clean up Barrio Logan in the interests of the people who live there, Big Money used the referendum process to overturn their democratically arrived at decision. They did the same when the City Council wanted to raise the minimum wage. They proved that they can buy off the electorate and get any result at the polls they want by simply putting enough money into TV ads. They can also buy off politicians because without big money to pay for TV campaign ads, politicians don’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell of getting elected.
If a candidate agrees not to accept private contributions or use his or her own money, they would receive a limited amount (75 cents per resident) of public funding to be used exclusively to campaign. Clean Elections will cost every San Diegan $6 per year, a small price to pay for Clean Government.
“Clean Elections is designed to break the conflict of interest between campaign contributors and candidates,” explained Michael McQuary, chair of Neighborhoods for Clean Elections. “San Diego city government is broken. Developers, lobbyists and special interests get almost everything they want because they grease the palms of the politicians with campaign cash. As a result neighborhoods and ordinary citizens are often left out of the political process. Clean Elections will help clean up San Diego City Hall.”
The San Diego Clean Elections Initiative is modeled after Clean Elections laws already on the books in several cities and states. Maine and Arizona have Clean Elections for state candidates and the City of Albuquerque has implemented Clean Elections for local candidates. Under the Clean Elections model, candidates who pledge to “run Clean” need to qualify for funding. The idea is to eliminate “crank” or marginal candidates in favor of those who can demonstrate community support. In San Diego a “Clean” candidate would be required to collect $5 from 500 voters in his or her district to qualify for funding, and those proceeds would go into the city’s Clean Elections fund.
The San Diego Chapter of the League of Women Voters has announced its endorsement of the San Diego Clean Elections Initiative, chapter co-President Ann Hoiberg said. “Clean Elections would make a fundamental difference in San Diego politics. We need to get money out of San Diego politics and return political power to people and our neighborhoods,” she said.
Candidates would be funded based upon a formula linked to population. These amounts would be on average, less than half of what sucessful council candidates have spent in recent elections. Clean Elections is a voluntary system — candidates who do not wish to opt in may still choose to run under existing rules, collecting funds from private contributors and spending their own funds.
“With Clean Elections, candidates can spend their time knocking on doors and meeting the voters they wish to serve,” Hoiberg said. “They won’t spend all of their time catering to the donor class. We will get candidates who owe their election to their constituency, the voters, instead of their contributors.
It would be nice if we could have publicly funded elections at the national level, but that would be a lot more complicated to bring about. However, it is a real possibility to get money out of politics at the local level and that is what the Clean Elections Initiative is all about. Getting this initiative on the 2016 ballot would be the first step towards a true democracy that would serve the people instead of what we have now – government which is sold to the highest bidder.
For more information or to help get his important initiative on the ballot, please contact John Hartley at 619-299-8870 or hartley2k@aol.com. Their website is www.sdcleanelections.org.
John Lawrence
Latest posts by John Lawrence (see all)
- Economist Kenneth Arrow, Nobel Laureate, Dead at 95 - March 22, 2017
- Container Ships Burn Dirtiest Fuel: the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Could Change That - March 15, 2017
- Cities and States Prefer Public Banks To Wall Street - March 7, 2017
Exhibit 1 in the case for getting money out of politics: The latest staffer’s legal complaint filed against supervisor Dave Roberts. She claims he directed her to conduct fundraising and campaign activities on her County work time.
See: http://zhlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Complaint.pdf
FYI, this person used to work in my legislative office.The legislature provided all of us with mandatory training on ethics including fundraising do’s and don’ts. Apparently no such training is provided for County supervisors or employees.
I like this idea; I know some people in Maine who are very happy with their clean elections…it sure seems like candidates/ elected officials dedicate more quality resources to campaign fundraising than understanding and doing their jobs…
You know, the idea’s attractive but Clean Elections still links money to politics, $5 a pop. Legislative recusal might be a consideration, so that a legislator/council member would be forbidden from voting upon issues a person or corporation that’s contributed to their campaign would benefit from. I know Libertarians and NeoCons and Tea Partyers (do they still exist?) and Cons and Republicans will ask who’ll pay for such broad and intensive investigations but, so what? We have city or county or state attorneys who are already paid to enforce the law, and if they don’t do that, then we can vote them out of office.
Another option might be that Mr. Big will just have to buy the voters directly at, say, $6 a pop. At least that would increase registration.
One of the questions about clean elections is does the candidate himself have to go around collecting the $5 from constituents or can he have a surrogate do it? If a surrogate, then the big money will have no problem collecting.
Also what’s to prevent a candidate not participating in the clean election from outspending his clean opponents?
There in lies the problem.
In some clean election cases, they clarify that funds will be allocated to match those given by a candidate to him/herself up to a certain limit. The amount varies by race, size of electorate etc.
So, wealthy people might still be tempted to buy elections, but they might think twice if they realize every dollar they give will be matched into their opponent’s coffers.
I would suggest another change: wealthy candidates who “loan” themselves money for their own election, and then win, must consider those funds the “cost of doing business” expense, and not be able to fundraise to pay themselves back.
However, if they lose, they can try to recoup their financial losses.
Why the difference? Because- They will discover people LOVE to give money to people in office, but are not so eager to do so when a candidate loses.
Perhaps this added risk to their own money being gone for good will make them less willing to write those personal checks to their campaigns…
As treasurer of Neighborhood for Clean Election I am pleased to see our grassroots campaign getting some attention. I’ve not been surprised by the flood of money caused the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Citizens United case. Has it ever been any different than now? Only now it has become clear who owns the people we elect. We the people who vote our candidates should own the people we elect and not giant corporations who only answer to shareholders.
I like the concept of clean elections and we need a level playing field with no one able to siphon extra funds from under cover connections and/or backers with vested interests.
Thanks John for writing and submitting this article on our campaign to get clean elections in San Diego. As I see it, it is the only way we can fundamentally reform San Diego politics. Right now the developers and the big money contributors get what they want while our neighborhood needs are sacrificed or ignored. You can see the whole initiative on our web page: http://www.sdcleanelections.org along with our endorsements, including 23 town councils, community councils and community associations.
As a member of our Coordinating Committee for Neighborhoods for Clean Elections, I want to thank John Lawrence for updating the public on our Clean Elections Campaign for November 2016. Poll after poll shows that all citizens of every political affiliation believe there is too much money in politics. Now it is 1 dollar equals 1 vote, not 1 person with 1 vote. Thank you John for giving the real significant examples of Barrio Logan and the Minimum Wage decision, which was passed by our City Council democratically, but undermined and side lined by powerful moneyed interests in our City. This is not how Municipal democracy is supposed to work. Please think of joining our campaign. The change can begin now. Contact us at sdcleanelections.org or call John Hartley at 619-299-8870. Terri Prevost
This is clearly a groundbreaking initiative which will restore us to the maxim of By the people for the people. For too long our country has been By the corporations for the corporations.
This is giving us the vision of representatives in office who do not have millions in the bank, or do not have to spend a high proportion of their time raising funds for their next election.
I’m excited by the vision of working men and women of all backgrounds and races in office – representatives who know what it is to struggle to pay the rent each month – representatives of the American people.
Let’s do this in San Diego.
Good article about Clean Elections, followed by excellent comments. With ongoing comments over the years about “elections being bought,” this appears to be the beginning solution. For sure, the voter will have far more respect and vote for the candidate running on a Clean Elections ballot. It also appears to be refreshingly non-partisan! I would be glad to help this group in their petition drive. Thanks for the information.