Measure H: Clean Money
This measure illustrates how difficult it can be to do something small and good. It would ban contributions by city contractors and bidders while bolstering the city's public financing system.
Any time politicians are asked to change the system that got them elected, it can be an uphill slog. And though they're relatively incremental, these changes were hard-fought.
Since the early 1990s, the city has had a fund to provide matching contributions to city candidates. The idea is to level the playing field for underfunded challengers and reduce the corrosive power of fundraising.
The city is required to contribute $3 million per year to the fund, but it has been capped at $12 million. Measure H would lift the cap, allowing the fund to build up enough cash for the 2013 election - when an open mayor's race and council term limits will create a record demand for matching funds.
Getting it on the ballot required building a coalition of the council's liberal idealists - such as Eric Garcetti, Jose Huizar and Paul Koretz - with those more focused on the bottom line.
Council members less enamored of public financing - like Janice Hahn and Tony Cardenas - worried that the fund would take money from essential city services in tough times. So supporters added an ability to borrow from the fund during fiscal emergencies.
Even with that modification, the four most pro-business council members - Greig Smith, Dennis Zine, Bernard Parks and Jan Perry - voted no.
Although he voted against the measure, Parks said he agrees that "a person should not be able to give a contribution while they are competing for a contract." It's worth noting that several city contractors, including airport concessionaires Hudson News and Soto & Sanchez, have contributed to his re-election campaign.
Most of the credit for the measure goes to Garcetti and the California Clean Money Campaign, which kept up the pressure to get Measure H on the ballot.
"This is a modest step," says Trent Lange, president of the clean-money group. "It's not going to solve everything, but it does get rid of one of the most corruptive contribution sources."
See the article on LA Weekly 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.)