In an era of “clean elections” we’ve never seen so much dark money interests invading campaigns. And more is on the horizon courtesy of the Supreme Court decision a few years ago that allows the influence of independent expenditures.
On a local level, particularly with regard to education elections with a lot on the line in the charter school versus anti-charter movement, thousands of dollars from outside interests have flooded elections. As we segue into a mayoral cycle, depending on the emergence of challengers to Mayor Bill Finch, we may see a whole bunch of loot from independent expenditures.
The Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court basically says you can spend all you want in the cause to elect or defeat a candidate as long as its not coordinated with the respective campaign. Translation: you can’t conspire with a candidate or campaign to spend a bunch of cash to help him. There’s supposed to be a firewall. “I see nothing, I know nothing.”
The outside campaign grease raises questions about the impact on Connecticut’s public finance system.
From Greg Hladky and Daniela Altimari, Hartford Courtant:
The intent of the clean-election laws was to severely limit special interest contributions from lobbying groups, state contractors and others interested in influencing the outcome of elections.
“It is no longer clean and bears no resemblance to what was once heralded as a paragon of good government,” House Republican Minority Leader Themis Klarides, R-Derby, said recently of Connecticut’s troubled public financing system.
State Republican Chairman Jerry Labriola Jr. said he hopes the legislature makes some changes. “Certainly, there are many aspects of [the public financing system] that leave a lot to be desired,” he said.
Full story here.
The state voluntary public financing program is in need of real reform. Too many loopholes have been created by the Democrats in the legislature that serve to undermine the purpose of the law. One recent example is allowing contractors to contribute to the state Democratic Party and then allowing the state party to pay for things that benefit the Governor’s campaign. The state Democratic Party also used funds from its federal account for state campaigns. This is being litigated but the elections are over!