Senator Durbin and Rep Tierney Introduce Bills Today to Reform Financing of Congressional Elections

[flpoljunkie]

We must make our voices heard in Congress and get these bills passed while we control the agenda. Let the Republicans try to block it, an we will hold them accountable in November, 2008!

DURBIN, SPECTER, TIERNEY INTRODUCE BILLS TO REFORM FINANCING OF CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

WASHINGTON, DC - U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Congressman John Tierney (D-MA) today unveiled two bipartisan bills - one dealing with Senate races; the other focused on House contests - to restore public confidence in the Congressional elections process. Both bills would allow qualified candidates to receive campaign financing from a public fund instead of from lobbyists and other special interests.

"Today the amount of money spent in top ten competitive Senate races averages $34 million per campaign - double what it was just four years ago. It takes a mountain of money - about $7 million on average - even to lose a Senate campaign. This is not sustainable," said Durbin. "People who say the public shouldn't have to pay for elections are missing the point: The American people already pay for elections - in ways that favor incumbents and special interests and in a Congressional agenda spawned too many times by those who finance our campaigns. Public financing will cost us only a fraction of what the current system costs."

Durbin's legislation, known as the Fair Elections Now Act would create a voluntary system that gives Senate candidates the option to stop dialing for dollars and attending fundraisers, without unilaterally disarming against a well-financed opponent. For those who participate, fundraising would be limited to raising "seed money" in amounts of no more than $100 per person to pay for campaign start-up costs. In addition, participating candidates would be required to demonstrate sufficient public support to merit Fair Elections funding by raising qualifying contributions of $5 each from a minimum number of state residents (based on the population of the state). Having demonstrated their viability, the candidates would be eligible to receive Fair Elections funds.

This legislation establishes a formula for determining the level of public funding provided to qualifying candidates for the primary and general election cycles. The amount would vary based on the population of the state, with the allocation for the primary equaling two-thirds of the allocation for the general election. The allocations would also be adjusted for the cost differences in the various media markets covering each state. Participants would receive vouchers for purchasing broadcast air time and would receive a 20% discount below the lowest unit cost on all advertising purchased near the end of the primary and general campaigns.

The legislation is modeled after the Fair Elections-type systems that have already been implemented at the state and local levels such as those in Arizona and Maine.

"Five years ago today, the Senate passed the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reforms banning huge soft-money donations to political parties. Earlier this year, we passed lobbying reforms," said Durbin. "But the truth is, we can pass all the lobbying and ethics reforms in the world and it won't solve the real problem. Special interest money will always find new loopholes to work its way into campaigns until we change the system fundamentally."

The Fair Elections Now Act is supported by a wide range of organizations, including the Americans for Campaign Reform, Common Cause, Democracy 21, Public Citizen, U.S. PIRG, AFL-CIO, AFSCME, Campaign for Americas Future, Communications Workers of America, League of Conservation Voters, League of Women Voters, Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, MoveOn.org, NAACP, National Council of Churches USA, SEIU, Sierra Club and US Action.

http://www.durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=270951

[More Than A Feeling]

1. Remember, when representatives can't compete on cash, they'll have to compete on ideas.

And the only audience among whom they can compete on those ideas is us. I'd like to see any of them try to brush off our letters and phone calls once this passes!

What's more, without the need to beg before corporate dollars, more people (like us) will have the ability to run for office. I'll be calling my representative and senators and asking them to support this bill. Will you?

We should also call the presidential candidates, Democratic and Republican, and get them on record opposing or supporting this bill. I know Edwards supports public financing.

[flpoljunkie]

2. Once the bills are introduced, we must encourage our Reps, Senators to co-sponsor the bill.

[flpoljunkie]

3. To get the ball rolling, sign on a citizen co-sponsor today!

From an email from the Clean Money, Clean Elections Campaign...

Today, Assistant Senate Majority Leader Richard Durbin (D-IL), alongside sponsor Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) introduced the bipartisan Fair Elections Now Act. Modeled on the successful systems in Maine, Arizona, and North Carolina, the bill will provide full public financing for qualified congressional candidates. Joining Sens. Durbin and Specter, Representatives John Tierney (D-MA), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), and Todd Platts (R-PA) will introduce companion legislation, the Clean Money Clean Elections Act in the House of Representatives.

Already law in seven states and two cities, “Clean Elections”-style public financing allows candidates to seek office without having to court wealthy special interests for campaign contributions. Instead, the men and women running to represent you in Congress would have the opportunity to ask you and your fellow voters for small $5 “qualifying contributions.” After candidates collect a set number of these, candidates receive public funds to mount a competitive campaign and also agree to accept no private contributions and must adhere to strict spending limits. Once in office, they are accountable only to the voters.

Sens. Durbin and Specter and Reps. Tierney, Grijalva, and Platts have taken a huge step forward in bringing Clean Elections to both chambers of Congress, in a strong show of the bipartisan support behind winning this important campaign reform.

Please show your support for Clean Elections in Congress by signing on as a citizen co-sponsor today!

http://ga3.org/campaign/fairelectionsnow

[karynnj]

10. That's interesting

"Modeled on the successful systems in Maine, Arizona, and North Carolina" The Maine and Arizona systems were modelled on Kerry"s and Wellstone"s Clean Election bill, authored by Kerry - I think Biden was one of the original co-sponsors.

[flpoljunkie]

13. I believe Biden was an original co-sponsor of Kerry's CLEAN MONEY, CLEAN ELECTIONS ACT.

[karynnj]

14. One of the very few - Biden deserves a lot of credit for that

Kerry introduced and re-introduced it several times.

[flpoljunkie]

17. There were four Co-Sponsors of Senator Kerry's 1997 bill, as listed below.

S.918

Title: A bill to reform the financing of Federal Elections.
Sponsor: Sen Kerry, John F. (introduced 6/17/1997) Cosponsors (4)
Latest Major Action: 6/17/1997 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
COSPONSORS(4), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)

Sen Biden, Joseph R., Jr. - 6/17/1997
Sen Glenn, John H., Jr. - 6/17/1997
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. - 6/17/1997
Sen Wellstone, Paul D. - 6/17/1997

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:SN00918:@@@P

[Radical Activist]

4. I don't want my tax dollars to fund Tom Delay's campaigns

or his conservative allies. I don't like public financing.

[tkmorris]

5. But the alternative is private financing

And believe me, given the cost of winning any election to national office, this means that all elected officials will be put there by corporate or PAC money. That is what is wrong with the process now.

If you don't accept public financing as a solution that's fine, but you have to offer some alternative. The system we have now is badly broken; we cannot simply ignore the problem.

[Radical Activist]

6. The alternative I support

is forcing TV and radio stations to give free advertising to candidates. That takes away the biggest expense of campaigns and makes it possible for candidates to win without so much corporate money.

[tkmorris]

7. That's not a bad start

But I believe it will effectively limit advertising on MSM because if they are forced to give it away for free they will either have to negotiate a low amount of mandatory "free" airtime or increase paid for advertising dramatically to cover the costs. Either way the ability of a candidate to get their message out through media advertising will be decreased. This in turn gives an even larger advantage to incumbents than they have currently.

In addition, there are other methodologies to spread a candidates message or raise their name recognition outside of MSM, and all of them cost money. Signs, stickers, town hall style meetings to introduce the candidate, staffs, call centers, and so on. It's damned expensive, and it's the only way to defeat an incumbent unless he's got one foot in a jail cell.

[Radical Activist]

11. More than half of spending

on major Congressional and Senate campaigns is on TV advertising. Its by far the biggest expense.

Eliminating that expense will mean someone can raise $500,000 and be a serious candidate. A good candidate can raise that kind of money from unions and other non-corporate sources. It means my tax dollars won't go toward conservatives and wackjob Democrats with no chance of winning.

[flpoljunkie]

9. Legislation provides for 20% discount below the lowest unit advertising purchased near campaigns end

"Participants would receive vouchers for purchasing broadcast air time and would receive a 20% discount below the lowest unit cost on all advertising purchased near the end of the primary and general campaigns."

[Radical Activist]

12. That by itself

would help a lot without my tax dollars going to conservatives and nutjob candidates.

[flpoljunkie]

8. Public funding levels the playing field, and why many in Congress will oppose public financing.

[flpoljunkie]

15. Durbin's bill numbered S.936. A bill to reform the financing of Senate elections

S.936

Title: A bill to reform the financing of Senate elections, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Durbin, Richard (introduced 3/20/2007) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 3/20/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.

[flpoljunkie]

16. Duplicate post.