Election Reforms Weakened
Committee gifts thwart spending controls
A dramatic increase in independent expenditure committees, coupled with the continuing power of incumbency, has weakened Los Angeles' campaign-spending reforms, according to a study released Tuesday.
In an 87-page report on its own operation, the city Ethics Commission said landmark city reforms adopted in 1990 have reduced some campaign spending, but have not reduced the advantages of incumbency and the candidate fundraising gaps it creates.
"It shows the present system doesn't work," Ethics Commissioner Bill Boyarsky said. "If you just look at last year's campaigns, it shows that most of the money was spent outside of public financing and a lot of it we couldn't control because it was independent expenditures."
About $5 million in public matching funds was spent in 2005 Los Angeles races - but nearly $25 million came from private sources.
Boyarsky and Commission President Gil Garcetti called for the city to abandon its partial public financing system in favor of full public financing.
Even though it would not affect candidates who are opposed to public financing or independent expenditures, Boyarsky said he believes such a system could better reduce the impact of contributions on races.
"You have to say up front, and be honest, that no system is perfect. But it would be better than what we are seeing," Boyarsky said.
Under city ethics laws, candidates limit contributions and spending in local campaigns to qualify for matching funds. Those limits can be lifted, however, based on overall spending in a race.
As an example, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and former Mayor James Hahn each received $1.6 million in matching funds for their mayoral campaigns for the May 2005 election.
In all, however, Villaraigosa spent $6.7 million and Hahn spent $4.3 million, including more than $1.5 million each from independent committees. Villaraigosa won by a 59-41 percent margin.
But while Villaraigosa defeated an incumbent,
|
|||||
most incumbent city officials have been able to avoid serious challenges to a second term in office.
"Intended to create more turnover among elected officials, in practice, it appears that single, eight-year terms in office with largely noncompetitive re-election campaigns are emerging for many incumbents," the report said.
In last year's election, City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo ran unopposed, as did Council members Eric Garcetti, Alex Padilla and Janice Hahn. The other incumbents seeking office faced light opposition.
Bob Stern of the Center for Governmental Studies, who worked on the original reform proposals, said he was pleased the city's rules were being reviewed.
"After 15 years, I think it is time to look to try to improve it," Stern said. "You are never going to have a perfect system, but the more you do to limit contributions, the better."
But Stern also questioned the issue of incumbency and term limits.
"I'm not sure that there was any opposition to incumbents before term limits," Stern said. "This system forces a change at least every eight years."
Ethics Commission Director Leeann Pelham said she believes the reforms have been successful, even if challenged by the role of independent expenditures.
"It's a mixed result," Pelham said. "Since we've been in situations with term limits, we see fewer challengers."
Rick Orlov, (213) 978-0390
See the article on Los Angeles Daily News website
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)