Public Campaign Financing Leads to Candidate Diversity

By Christopher R. Moylan, Commentary

Tuesday is Election Day in some Santa Clara County cities, that inspiring time when active community members step up and volunteer to spend up to 20 hours per week to make sure that our cities are run properly. All candidates deserve applause for enduring the campaign process.

The reason that we don't have more of them can be summarized by one number: $45,000. That was the average amount spent by the seven of us who ran for the Sunnyvale City Council in 2005. If you can't afford to part with a large sum in the event that you are defeated at the polls, then join the hundreds of other qualified people who have chosen not to run for office.

As the costs of campaigning have increased, fewer candidates have come forward. That's a problem for everyone. Every time a citizen who would have done a good job chooses not to run, the quality of local government suffers. Because the primary function of local government is to make sure that cities are well-run, part of the cost of doing business should include ensuring that there is an adequate number of candidates on the ballot every time. The way to accomplish that goal is through public financing of campaigns.

There are two reasons why city council campaigns have become so expensive, and we voters are responsible for both of them. First, we have demonstrated repeatedly that we base our votes primarily on name recognition rather than qualifications. And second, we have enacted term limits in most cities, which results in a disproportionately large fraction of new candidates, who don't yet have any name recognition. We want newcomers to step up and run, but we won't vote for them unless we have heard of them.

If you doubt the first assertion, cast your mind back to the 2003 gubernatorial recall election, featuring 135 candidates on a statewide ballot. The sitting lieutenant governor and a prominent state senator were defeated by an actor. Pornographer Larry Flynt, actor Gary Coleman and porn actress Mary Carey placed in the top 10. There is no way to explain those results, and results of many other elections, other than name recognition being the primary qualification for office in the minds of most voters.

In order to acquire that name recognition, city council candidates must produce and mail political fliers to all likely voters, in addition to knocking on as many of those peoples' doors as possible. In Sunnyvale, each one of those mailers costs about $10,000. With the number of absentee voters increasing, candidates need to send a minimum of two mailers to be viable - one for regular voters and one for absentee voters. Typically, additional mailers are required to inform voters about endorsements and other breaking events that occur during the campaign. And the price of postage is going up every year.

That money has to come from somewhere. At the moment, it comes from individuals and groups who can afford to make political contributions. Public financing is a fairer alternative.

The list of cities that have adopted public financing of city council campaigns is growing. Candidates in those cities who demonstrate some public support, and who agree to abide by a voluntary spending limit, qualify for public campaign funds. In every city whose public financing program has been in place long enough to determine results, the number and diversity of candidates running for city council have increased. In San Francisco, there was only one contested city election in 2000, the year Proposition O was passed. In 2004, all seven city races were contested elections.

How much do these results cost? A common spending cap is $1 per registered voter for each candidate. In Sunnyvale, where there are about 50,000 registered voters, and where an average of 7.4 candidates ran in the past eight elections, the upper limit would average $369,000. That's only $2.73 per citizen, every other year. It's 0.14 percent of the city budget.

Admittedly, for some people even 1 cent is too much taxpayer money to "give to politicians." But for those of us who want a lot of choice at the ballot box, it's a bargain.

See the article on San Jose Mercury 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.)