Public Financing
If you want to run for public office in Illinois, the first question
campaign staff, political parties, and even reporters will ask you
is, can you raise the money? Even before the first votes are cast,
observers note the existence of a “money primary” where
a candidate’s strength is measured solely by how much money
they can raise.
There are many good, qualified people who could serve as judges
in Illinois. Unfortunately, not all of them can raise enough funds
to run for election. But money should not be a barrier to holding
public office.
The primary goal of public financing proposals is to reduce the
influence of special interest money and in the case of judicial
public financing, encourage public confidence in the judiciary.
The legislature in North Carolina recognized this and in 2002 passed
the Judicial Campaign Reform Act. The legislation also made statewide
races for judges nonpartisan and mandated the publication and distribution
of a voters guide.
In November 1998, the Citizens Clean Elections Act was approved
in Arizona, creating a system of “clean elections” whereby
statewide and legislative candidates could participate voluntarily
to receive a public benefit in exchange for meeting certain qualifying
thresholds. Since the legislation establishing the Fund?, there
have been three election cycles. Each cycle has seen an increase
in the number of candidates participating. In the first election
year (2000), there was 29% participation, during the 2002 cycle,
52% participated and in 2004, 56% participated. Of the 94 elected
offices on the Arizona ballot in 2004, participating candidates
won more than half of them.
As part of the Justice at Stake - Illinois coalition, ICPR supports
a new system of public financing of Supreme Court campaigns. In
2005, bills have been introduced into the Illinois General Assembly:
SB 1955 (Raoul-Dillard-delValle) and HB
671 (Delgado-Fritchey-Coulson-Turner)
SB1955 (Raoul-Dillard-delValle) creates the Supreme Court Campaign
Reform Act. This legislation provides that candidates for the Supreme
Court may apply for a public financing benefit in connection with
their campaign. The public financing benefit is $750,000 for the
general primary and general election cycles. The legislation establishes
the requirements for qualifying for the public financing benefits
and limits the amount of private contributions qualified candidates
may accept. The amount a non-participating candidate may accept
private sources during campaign periods is $1,000 in the aggregate.
SB 1955 establishes the Illinois Supreme Court Democracy Trust Fund.
Provides for the increase of the line of credit if non-complying
candidates make certain expenditures. Sets penalties for violations
of the Act. It provides that a payment for electioneering communications
is an "expenditure" as well as providing that a group
that "accepts contributions or makes expenditures during any
12-month period in an aggregate amount exceeding $3,000 for the
purpose of electioneering communications" is a political committee.
Allows the Board of Elections to impose a fine against a committee
that fails to report expenditures that could trigger matching funds
under the Supreme Court Campaign Reform Act. The Supreme Court Campaign
Reform Act requires the Department of Revenue to print on its standard
individual income tax form a provision by which the taxpayer may
make a contribution (not less than $1) to the Illinois Supreme Court
Democracy Trust Fund and requires circuit court clerks to transfer
$1 from each appearance fee paid to the State Treasurer for deposit
into the Supreme Court Democracy Trust Fund and, to defray that
expense, the county board may, by resolution, require the clerk
of the circuit court in the county to charge and collect a Supreme
Court Democracy Trust Fund fee of not more than $1, which shall
be paid at the time that any appearance fee is paid. The Fund will
be considered operational when $5 million from all permissible sources
has been deposited into it.
What's at Stake: Campaigns for judicial office have increasingly
looked like partisan elections, with large contributions from special
interests, including litigants with cases pending before the court.
Replacing private funds with public money is a way of protecting
the integrity and image of the judiciary.
SB 1955 passed the Illinois Senate Executive Committee on March
16, 2005 and awaits passage before the full Senate. In 2003, similar
legislation passed the Illinois Senate on a bi-partisan vote.
HB 671 (Delgado-Fritchey-Coulson-Turner, Osterman,
McKeon, Krause, Boland, McCarthy, Nekritz, E. Lyons and Hamos)
creates the Supreme Court Campaign Reform Act. This legislation
provides that candidates for the Supreme Court may apply for a public
financing benefit in connection with their campaign. The public
financing benefit is $750,000 for the general primary and general
election cycles. The legislation establishes the requirements for
qualifying for the public financing benefits and limits the amount
of private contributions qualified candidates may accept. The amount
a non-participating candidate may accept private sources during
campaign periods is $1,000 in the aggregate. HB 671 establishes
the Illinois Supreme Court Democracy Trust Fund. Provides for the
increase of the line of credit if non-complying candidates make
certain expenditures. Sets penalties for violations of the Act.
It provides that a payment for electioneering communications is
an "expenditure" as well as providing that a group that
"accepts contributions or makes expenditures during any 12-month
period in an aggregate amount exceeding $3,000 for the purpose of
electioneering communications" is a political committee. Allows
the Board of Elections to impose a fine against a committee that
fails to report expenditures that could trigger matching funds under
the Supreme Court Campaign Reform Act. The Supreme Court Campaign
Reform Act requires the Department of Revenue to print on its standard
individual income tax form a provision by which the taxpayer may
make a contribution (not less than $1) to the Illinois Supreme Court
Democracy Trust Fund and requires circuit court clerks to transfer
$1 from each appearance fee paid to the State Treasurer for deposit
into the Supreme Court Democracy Trust Fund and, to defray that
expense, the county board may, by resolution, require the clerk
of the circuit court in the county to charge and collect a Supreme
Court Democracy Trust Fund fee of not more than $1, which shall
be paid at the time that any appearance fee is paid. The Fund will
be considered operational when $5 million from all permissible sources
has been deposited into it.
What's at Stake: Campaigns for judicial office have increasingly
looked like partisan elections, with large contributions from special
interests, including litigants with cases pending before the court.
Replacing private funds with public money is a way of protecting
the integrity and image of the judiciary.
|
