{"id":2295,"date":"2019-09-09T07:44:04","date_gmt":"2019-09-09T11:44:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/?p=2295"},"modified":"2019-09-09T07:44:04","modified_gmt":"2019-09-09T11:44:04","slug":"campaign-finance-overhaul-begins","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/campaign-finance-overhaul-begins\/","title":{"rendered":"Campaign Finance Overhaul Begins"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Campaign finance reform, long-promised but never enacted,\nis starting to take shape in New York.  As\npart of this year\u2019s budget agreement, Governor Cuomo and the legislative majorities\nagreed to establish a Commission to create a voluntary system of public\nfinancing of elections.  In and of\nitself, the creation of a commission was not new; there have been other\nblue-ribbon panels that have examined the issue.  What was new was that the Commission\u2019s\nrecommendations would have the force of law when approved by December 1st<\/sup>\nof this year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This week, the Commission is holding the first of five\npublic hearings on the issue.  Sounds\npromising.  But there are some early signs\nof trouble that could undermine the Commission\u2019s work.  The Commission apparently has no resources \u2013\nit doesn\u2019t even have its own website for example \u2013 and has no staff.  The invitations to testify were sent from\nindividual commissioners\u2019 email addresses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Given the paucity of resources, how should the Commission\nbest achieve its goals?  Let\u2019s start by\nexamining why the system is needed in the first place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to a new report<\/a>\nissued by the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG), currently state\nlegislators run for office relying on private<\/em>\ncampaign contributions.  Overwhelmingly the\nsources of that money are typically powerful and wealthy interests.  The report found that organized interests,\nbusinesses, and individuals contributing more than $200, represented roughly 90 percent<\/em> of the money raised by the\nwinners of state Senate and Assembly elections.  The biggest category of\ncontributors were political action committees and limited liability companies \u2013\nboth of which usually have business before the government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such a system, one in which the bulk of the money paying\nfor the campaigns of state candidates comes from parties with a vested interest\nin legislative outcomes, creates an inherent conflict of interest.  Lawmakers rely on campaign funds from\ninterest groups and then meet with their lobbyists who are asking for\nfavors.  Sometimes those favors result in\nscandals and corruption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\u2019s why previous commissions examining New York\nState\u2019s campaign financing system have been harshly critical.  One commission in the 1980s called New York\u2019s\ncampaign financing system a \u201cdisgrace\u201d and an \u201cembarrassment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thirty years ago when then-Governor Mario Cuomo and state\nlegislators could not agree on reforms, the 1980s commission scolded state\nleaders for failing to act, charging that \u201cInstead partisan, personal and\nvested interests have been allowed to come before larger public interests.\u201d  That same commission, on the other hand,\ncongratulated New York City public officials who had worked to create a\nvoluntary system of public financing for candidates running in City elections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A voluntary campaign financing system, that commission\nbelieved, was an important reform that could provide the resources for\ncandidates \u2013 but without attaching the strings that all too often come when\nprivate contributions are donated by interest groups.  Thus, a public financing system could both\nreduce the influence of powerful interest groups and reduce the risk of\npolitical corruption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Three decades later, the New York City system has\nexpanded and evolved into a model for the nation.  Indeed, in the 2018 City election, voters overwhelmingly\nvoted to approve a referendum proposal that further strengthened the system and\nCity voters agreed to additional tax dollars being used to fund the program.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So what should the new Commission, with a mandate to\nestablish a voluntary system of public financing for state government, do? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since the new Commission appears to have little or no\nresources and the deadline for finalizing its plan is December 1st<\/sup>,\nthe first step should be to embrace the successful, three-decade old program\nalready operating in the state of New York.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The program may need some tweaks to adapt it to state\nelections, but it is road tested.  By\nadvancing that program as its starting point, the debate over the next 90 days\nwould be focused on tweaks that may be necessary in order to scale up a\ncitywide program \u2013 in a municipality that accounts for nearly half of the\nstate\u2019s population \u2013 to one that covers all state offices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With fewer than 90 days until their plan is due, it makes\nlittle sense for the Commission to waste time contemplating the universe of possible\nsystems or focus on unnecessary election law changes.  By putting out the New York City program as\nits starting point, the Commission would have the benefit of 30 years of experience\nand could focus on details needed to scale it up to a statewide system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The clock is ticking. \nThe Commission has a lot of work to do; New Yorkers must hope that they\nattack their responsibilities with a smart strategy based on success.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Campaign finance reform, long-promised but never enacted, is starting to take shape in New York.  As part of this year\u2019s budget agreement, Governor Cuomo and the legislative majorities agreed to establish a Commission to create a voluntary system of public financing of elections.  In and of itself, the creation of a commission was not new; […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2295","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2295","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2295"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2295\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2296,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2295\/revisions\/2296"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2295"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2295"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2295"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}