Bulletin Newspapers
Campaign finance reforms debated at hearing
April 16, 2009
By: Joseph Mont
City Councilor Sam Yoon, a candidate for Mayor, presided over a hearing last Thursday that could set the state for local campaign finance reform. The hearing was convened by the Committee on Government Operations, which invited expert witnesses to testify about making municipal elections more competitive through changes to the City’s election laws.
“Boston is a city with over 300,000 registered voters, but only 46,000 turned out for the last city election,” Yoon said. “We need more competitive elections, and we need to limit the excessive power of incumbency. Campaign finance reform has dramatically increased competition in other cities, and we can do it here in Boston.”
In a statement, Yoon detailed his ideas for how local elections should be reformed. These ideas include:
(Bullet) Limit the amount of campaign funds an elected official can carry over from one campaign to the next.
“Any money left over could be donated to charity,” Yoon said. “This is done in other jurisdictions, and it works. Limiting the amount politicians can carry over will prevent incumbents from amassing huge war chests that discourage challengers.”
(bullet) Limit the amount that individuals who do business with the city can contribute to $200.
“We must end the pay-to-play culture in Boston,” Yoon said. “City contracts should go to the best bidder. Period. Whether you are a developer looking for help from the BRA or a caterer hired for a public event, the playing field should be level.”
(bullet) Explore public financing of campaigns.
“In these difficult economic times, there will likely be little appetite for setting aside taxpayer dollars to fund elections for politicians,” Yoon said. “However, the ultimate solution to an even playing field for democracy rests on public financing.”
Limit the amount that the mayor’s employees can give to their boss to $25.
“About 4,000 city employees can be directly hired and fired by the Mayor,” Yoon said. “According to a Boston Globe story from 2005, when asked about a $500 contribution to her boss the Mayor, one city employee said, “I figured that is what you are supposed to give.”
Testifying at the hearing, Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause, said there are a variety of significant reforms that Boston could adopt to foster fair and competitive elections.
“Public financing is the gold standard of reform, but there are other things we can do to change the system like limiting or banning contributions by contractors who do business with the city and not allowing incumbents to roll over their campaign funds from cycle to cycle,” she said.
Dan Weeks, president of Americans for Campaign Reform, was instrumental in successful campaigns to enact New England’s first municipal public funding ordinance for New Haven’s mayoral elections. He recommended campaign finance reform as a way to reduce influence of powerful special interests.
“The pay to play system is deeply engrained,” he said. “I want to stress the importance of addressing the source of the donations.”
“For elections to work, they must be competitive,” Yoon said. “Unfortunately, in Boston – the birthplace of American democracy – competitive elections are all too rare. For too many ordinary citizens in Boston who are willing to serve, running for office isn’t even an option. Why? It’s the money. For most people, raising the money to mount a credible campaign is just too difficult. Unless you are independently wealthy, the bar is set too high for many worthy challengers.” John Bonifaz, legal director for Voter Action, strongly urged the city to adopt public financing for municipal elections.
“The question of how we finance our public elections is a core question for our democracy,” Bonifaz said. “In a democracy, public elections should be publicly financed. The promise of political equality for all demands no less.” City Councilor Maureen Feeney spoke of the gratitude she feels when a constituent sends a small donation. Her goal is to make these donors feel that their effort is meaningful, and not lost amid larger cash infusions.
“I have one resident and every year he sends me a $5 donation with a beautiful note,” she said. “It means the world to me.”
Feeney took issue with an idea that was floated whereby candidates would no longer be able to carry over their “war chests” from year to year. She said that campaign funds are frequently used to support charitable causes in off-race years.
“I have a concern with an everything you take in you have to spend kind of thing,” he said. “In an election year you are obviously going to spend the money.. But some individuals do spend money in an off election year. They may send newsletters or something that keeps them in the public eye and there is nothing wrong with that.”
Yoon agreed.
“A lot of city councilors donate to charities with their campaign funds,” he said. “People come to you and say, “Can you support my hockey team?” or this charity or that. It almost becomes a program expense of being a district city councilor.”
Nearly all at the hearing agreed that Boston officials may face resistance from the State House if any proposed campaign reforms require a Home Rule Petition. But most agreed that the effort was still worth pursuing.
