A Call For Meaningful Campaign Finance
Reform
Deb Markowitz, Secretary of State
Remember our last election in
Vermont? Like most elections before it, candidates knocked on doors,
handed out literature outside of grocery stores and marched in parades.
Vermont's political candidates also raised money - lots and lots of it -
so that in the weeks leading up to the election they could run the
political advertisements that are essential if
a candidate wants to be
elected.
Much of the money raised in the
last election came from small donors - mostly within Vermont. But a lot
of the money that fueled the campaign engine in the year 2000 came from
out of state. Many campaigns received large contributions from the
national and state political parties - over a million dollars in the
governor's race alone. Because of this we don't really know where a lot
of the money came from to support those and other Vermont
campaigns.
Given all of these facts, it
seems ironic that the 2000 elections were also the first time our
candidates were governed by a new Vermont campaign finance law. When it
was passed, our law was widely recognized as the most comprehensive and
aggressive campaign finance law in the nation. Vermont's law strictly
limited candidate spending, contributions and out of state
money.
Our campaign finance law was
adopted, at least in part, to challenge rulings by the United States
Supreme Court. Perhaps then it is not surprising that - prior to the
2000 elections - the Federal courts struck down many of the law's
provisions as unconstitutional. This ruling created loopholes, gaps
which permitted unprecedented candidate and interest group spending in
the 2000 elections. We are now waiting for final court action. But we
may have to wait awhile. It is our hope that the Supreme Court will use
the Vermont case to take a fresh look at their earlier approach to
campaign finance laws, so it could be several years before we know what
shape Vermont's Campaign finance law will take.
However, we do not have to wait
until the courts make a final decision to reduce the influence of big
money in politics. We can even the playing field in Vermont's campaigns
right now, in part because the earlier court decision provided us with a
road map. The court said that - as long as we set a reasonable limit -
it was constitutionally permissible to limit the amount of money
political parties can provide to a candidate.
I urge the legislature to close
the political party loophole this year. That would prevent political
parties from pouring unlimited money into Vermont campaigns. In fact -
since all other contributions in statewide races are limited to $400 -
if the party loophole was closed there would be no opportunity for the
influence of really big money on politics in Vermont. This would even
the playing field dramatically. With political party contributions
capped at a reasonable amount, all candidates can play by the same rules
and all have equal opportunity to fundraise to support their
races.
As Secretary of State I have been
concerned with finding ways to address public cynicism about government
and those who govern. One way to do this is to reduce the influence of
money in the political process. Because of this belief I have worked
hard to successfully implement Vermont's campaign finance law, even as
it changed in the middle of a campaign year. I have also suggested to
the legislature ways in which we could improve and strengthen the law so
that it can accomplish its goals as we wait for the US Supreme Court to
take final action. Of all of those suggestions, closing the political
party loophole will do the most for bringing real campaign finance
reform to Vermont - and now. Not later.
