FOR: ASSEMBLY ELECTION LAW COMMITTEE CITIZENS UNION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS/N.Y.S.

NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP STATEMENT ON A.9885-C

IN ASSEMBLY, BILL NUMBER 9885-C., INTRODUCED BY MEMBER OF ASSEMBLY SILVER. AN ACT the 2012 fair elections act; relates to providing for optional partial public financing of certain election campaigns in the state; relates to identification of the source of certain political contributions A GOOD FIRST STEP FORWARD: This bill provides a strong step towards the campaign finance reforms that we hope to see enacted this session. We applaud Assembly Speaker Silver and the members of the Election Law Committee for jumpstarting this sessions discussion of how to repair our broken system of campaign finance. There are many laudable elements of this bill, including: the creation of a voluntary public financing system for all statewide and state legislative offices, which would make running for office a more feasible option for New Yorkers who cannot draw upon the network of wealthy donors who currently fund the majority of the states campaigns; a 6:1 match for donations up to $250; restrictions on the receipt of public funds for candidates who face little or no opposition; eligibility thresholds for the receipt of public funds that emphasize raising small donations from residents living in the district the office serves; a limit of one committee per participating candidate; a clear identification of funding sources; the inclusion of constitutional convention delegates as among those positions funded by the voluntary public financing system; and the requirement that participants in the voluntary public financing program participate in debates. NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT: While the proposed public financing proposal is generally strong, there are several ways in which this bill needs to be improved in order to give New Yorkers the true comprehensive campaign finance reform which is desperately needed. Most notably, this bills provisions only apply to candidates who choose to opt into the voluntary system, creating a two-tiered system for candidates running for office that extends beyond eligibility for public funds to all aspects of the campaign finance law including campaign contribution limits, receipt of funds from parties, personal use limitations, and the enforcement entity and provisions candidates would be subject to. Public Financing Candidates opting into the voluntary system of public financing would face contribution limits of $2,000 per election while other candidates would operate under the current rules which allow sky-high hard money contributions of up to $60,800 to statewide candidates. Enforcement The strengthened enforcement provisions in this bill would affect only those candidates who choose to opt in. This would create a structure unique to states with public financing systems. An independent board empowered to enforce and interpret campaign finance law needs to have the power to oversee all candidates and impose penalties on any candidate who violates the law, not just those who rely on public funding. The proposed auditing provisions need to be beefed up to ensure that there is real oversight over contributors, not just candidates. This board would be powerless to enforce violations committed by non-candidates, such as those committed by the hundreds of donors each year who give contributions above the legal limits. The proposed provisions creating the Campaign Finance Board need to be strengthened to ensure that it does not replicate the partisan gridlock of the Board of Elections and that the auditing, investigations and enforcement staff can act independently and that their recommendations for action will advance.
1

Party Spending This bill would not impact the ability of parties to fundraise. While party participation would be limited for participating candidates, those who opt out would be able to reap unlimited benefits from committees who could still raise over $100,000 per donor. We also believe that even these proposed limits would be undermined by the numerous party committees state, county, village, etc. could all spend money on their behalf. Even for participating candidates, caps on county committees spending money on behalf of a candidate can be circumvented because there is no aggregate limit on funds provided by all types of county committees. Every candidate could still benefit from the spending of their partys housekeeping committees. The expenditures of these committees is not used to explicitly benefit specific candidates, so money spent on things such as rent for a campaign office in a swing district would fall outside of the parameters of this bills spending limits. Disclosure Independent expenditures need to be disclosed more fully including requiring disclosure of electioneering communications, linking expenditures to candidates targeted, aligning disclosure with the election calendar, making materials provided to the Board more publicly accessible and requiring communications have disclaimers that reveal where more information on sources of income can be identified. More information should be required in all candidates disclosure statements. This should include disclosure of information on so-called bundlers and on donors employees. Closing Loopholes The existing law should be clarified to close the loophole which lets LLCs and LLPs give at the same rates as individuals. Donations from corporate subsidiaries and union affiliates should be added to the totals of their parent companies and organizations when calculating annual limits, as done in New York City. For more information:
CITIZENS UNION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS/N.Y.S. NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP Dick Dadey Barbara Bartoletti Bill Mahoney (917) 709-2896 (518) 469-8905 (518) 817-3738