Last fall, the state conducted its second “Fair and Clean Elections Pilot Project” which included state Senate and Assembly races in legislative districts 14, 24, and 37. The first pilot project took place in 2005 and included assembly races in two legislative districts –the 6th and 13th. This month, the legislature will consider a bill expanding this taxpayer subsidized political campaign scam far beyond its current level, which cost taxpayers over $4 Million in 2007 -- including $625,000 for one candidate alone.
A supplement to the “2007 Fair and Clean Elections Report” by the Center for Competitive Politics (CCP), a non-profit educational organization dedicated to promoting First Amendment political rights highlighted the problems with this program.
CCP’s analysis compared the stated policy goals of the pilot program with the actual outcomes and drew on the experiences of Arizona and Maine, two states that served as the model for the New Jersey scheme, to offer a fact-based analysis of the impact of taxpayer-subsidized political campaigns in the Garden State.
Sean Parnell, CCP president, said the "experiment with taxpayer-financed political campaigns finds that it failed to live up to its promises. Unfortunately for New Jersey taxpayers, they got stuck footing the bill for these broken promises and will continue to pay millions more in the future if this program is reauthorized.”
According to the CCP report, the pilot project failed to level the playing field by making elections even less competitive than they had been. In addition, the project failed in its goals of improving public opinion of the political process, reducing campaign spending, increasing voter turnout, ending negative campaigning and preventing out-of-state money from influencing New Jersey elections.
Now, as the legislature considers its third attempt at taxpayer-subsidized political campaigns, many legislators and advocacy groups are pointing out the failure of taxpayer subsidized campaigns and calling for the elimination of any future pilot programs.
“By almost all accounts, forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for political campaigns has failed,” said Assemblywoman Alison McHose (R-Sussex), “New Jersey is broke and we have the highest taxes in the nation. Politicians should fund their own campaigns, not ask the taxpayers for a handout.”
“In one district, the so-called ‘Clean Elections’ program turned out to be nothing more than a taxpayer subsidy to pro-public employee politicians,” Assemblyman Michael Doherty (R-Warren) noted, “This taxpayer financing freed up hundreds of thousands of public employee labor union PAC dollars to be spent in other races, and was clearly a significant reason why Republicans once again did not make any legislative gains in 2007.”
Independent expenditures continued in spite of the taxpayer subsidy. The CCP report notes that in Maine, independent expenditures have increased exponentially since taxpayers have begun footing the bill for political campaigns.
“No matter how hard government tries, it simply can’t keep citizens from exercising their First Amendment rights,” Parnell, the CCP president, explained. “And as the number of independent expenditures increases, so too will the cost to the taxpayers. And the cycle will go on and on and on with the hard pressed taxpayer getting a bigger and bigger bill.”
In addition to the program’s shortcomings highlighted in the CCP report, Assemblywoman McHose (R-Sussex) criticized the concept of government-financed elections as being fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment.
“Citizens should be able to choose to support candidates of their choice and not be forced to fund the campaigns of politicians with whom they disagree,” McHose said. “It’s simply un-American.”
This bill is scheduled for a committee hearing on Thursday, June 12, at 2:00 pm in Committee Room 13, 4th Floor, State House Annex, Trenton, NJ. Sean Parnell will be testifying before the committee at this meeting.
Steve Lonegan was Mayor of Bogota, NJ, and is Executive Director of Americans for Prosperity - New Jersey. Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP Foundation) are committed to educating citizens about economic policy and mobilizing those citizens as advocates in the public policy process. He is a prolific writer, having been published in newspapers and blogs. He just published a book, Putting Taxpayers First: A Blueprint for Victory in the Garden State, that discusses the impact of the Trenton government on the well being of the taxpayers of the state. He offers solid and workable solutions. Learn more at lonegan.com.
There is a good chance Gov. Jon Corzine will pick his running mate before July 16, if for no other reason than to get the Democratic Lt. Governor ... >
It's called making perfection the enemy of the good and it's the first lesson of legislating.
Every legislative action involves ... >
In a rebuke to Judge Sotomayor, who found neither empathy nor justice for victims of obvious racial discrimination, the SCOTUS struck another blow ... >
The re-election campaign of Governor Jon Corzine was down-right giddy this week when it was announced that the state's tax amnesty program ... >
Who is minding the Asylum! >
The legendary sports journalist, Jimmy Cannon of the now defunct New York Journal-American said of Howard Cosell: “His real name is Howard Cohen, ... >
Based on the first Republican debate, which I had the opportunity to watch in the NJN studio and participate in a panel discussion afterwards, it ... >
Bailout of Madoff Not Making Everyone Happy
Special to AP Newswire
With 700 billion dollars being spent on the General Motors bailout, AIG, ... >
Word on the "internet street" has it that all the "King Street Men" supposedly are busy gathering cash for Union County ... >
Last week the New Jersey State Legislature passed a $29 billion budget for fiscal 2010 which begins on July 1, 2009. Governor Corzine's budget ... >
and the governor's race, too?
Did Mayor Lonegan take government money for his race for 2005 Governor's race? Will he do so again next year?
One sided commentary.
Obviously, Mayor Lonegan has not paid attention to political campaigns in his home District 37, which was designated as a Clean Election District. Lonegan quotes two Assemblymembers from safe Republican districts as opposed to such campaign financing. Have they lived in District 37 for example, their views might have been different. It is hypocrisy to blame this Project for lack of gains by Republicans in state campaigns: "and was clearly a significant reason why Republicans once again did not make any legislative gains in 2007."
Clean elections?
What's clean about an election with a pre-determined result?
That's what you had in District 37, a pre-determined result based on the demograhics and the overwhelming number of Democrats in the district.
At least Republicans don't waste this forum with delusional rhetoric on how they can win like liberals in the 5th CD!
Only a fool would support state financed elections. Look at the federal level where candidates are easily raking up hundreds of millions of dollars with no money from taxpayers!
You think Obama wants a federally financed general election?
Please.
Mayor Lonegan is right. This isn't just welfare, it's enabling people who have no business running for public office in the first place.
Vote Column - All the way!
Cap what can be spent
There should be a maximum level of what can be spent on elections or even limit donations to strickly individuals.
Maybe there should be a cap on what you spend for a car
Or maybe your house, or maybe anything.
How about a cap on what someone can earn in a year?
Campaign finance "reform" is only another name for incumbency protection. The people who advocate this sillyness the most are the ones who want to see the same group of idiots running our state stay in power.
The Forest for the Trees
The Clean Election Program has not been an overwhelming success but neither has it been a complete failure. The intent of the program,as I understand it, is to allow candidates to operate outside of county organizing committe structure. That is something I would think the conservatives here would appreciate. It is well documeneted that alot of the "corruption" we so gleefully lambast eminates from these org's which have a stranglehold on local politics. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts, absolutely.
To the extent there is any one reason why Clean Elections has yet to bare fruit I would submit the following. Senior members of both parties, even in safe districts, cowered to county chairpeople and refused to endorse, help, donate to or otherwise campaign for Clean Election candidates. Once again our feckless leaders failed us.
Lastly, the program is brand spanking new. So give me a frigging break already.
I'm as fically conservative
I'm as fically conservative as they come, but the spending on elections is way out of control. It does not take $100 million to get your message out, especially since so many people have access to the internet nowadays. If you can't do it with much less than that, than you shouldn't be in this business where you must know how to prepare a budget. That's the big problem with politics, the in- crowd/politicians almost always have more money than they know what to do with. It's insane that NJ politicians spend so much money in the Philadelphia and NYC markets. If I was a donor and my money was being spent that way for an NJ election, I'd want my money back. The present system does limit free speech because very few people can compete with the Corzines of the world. Do we honestly want more Corzines in Congress - who paid $60M to get there? The system also supports incumbents and career politians beyond reason. If I was elected after accepting public funds, I would vow to save my constituents double that money in spending cuts or leave office after my first term was completed.
Clean Elections
I live in the 14th district. The system worked last year. The Rs and Ds both had the same amount of money-$1.6M. This was way too much for a district election and at least Baroni said so. Greenstein did not think so because in 2005 she spent $4M to get reelected to Baroni's $300k. They both won in 2005. Last year the Ds were given an extra $100k money because of a third party issue group. For the Dems this was about $17 per registered voter. This was plenty. The Ds won both Assembly seats and Baroni won the Senate seat. This is not a perfect system, but it works. It forces the candidates to go to their supporters to get the 400 $10.00 checks. Once the money is resolved then the only thing left is the message. From the Republican side, this needs work!
thanx
شات صوتي,دردشه
صوتيه,توبيك,توبيكات حسايف,مركز
تحميل,دليل
مواقع,العاب,منتديات
حسايف
حسايف
دردشة صوتية,منتديات الوله,شات ،
دردشه ،
دردشة
,
منتدى
رومات صوتيه
منتديات رجاوي الخليجيه