Iowa CCI conducted a poll of political donors across the state about their attitudes towards the influence of big money in politics and public financed elections…
CCI recently conducted a survey of current political donors to gauge their support of VOICE and taking big money out of politics. We conducted this survey because we believe that political donors would also support public financing to reduce the role that money plays in campaigning and the reliance on large contributions to candidates. The survey results show that those with a financial stake in the outcome of state elections believe that the current system is broken. We contacted 2,861 donors and conducted interviews with 1,502 people who were chosen because they donated to political candidates for state office. The charts that follow show the findings of this study, which break down support for VOICE by income, amount donated and political party.
While many may expect political donors to be content with the current system, our survey reveals that donors across the political and financial spectrum are in support of a system where people matter more, and money matters less.
The poll shows Iowans are against the influence of big money in politics.
When asked, “Many people believe there is too much money in the political process. Do you agree or disagree?” nearly nine out of 10 (88 percent of) donors said they agreed. Just six percent of respondents said they did not believe there was too much money in politics.
These sentiments go across party lines as well, with 89 percent of Democrats, 88 percent of Republicans, and 82 percent of Independents agreeing that there is too much money in politics.
The poll shows strong support across party lines for public financed elections and specifically the VOICE bill.
73 percent of political contributors support public financing as laid out in the VOICE Act as a way to reduce the role money is playing in our political process. (Only 20 percent were opposed.)2
This support also crosses party lines - 75 percent of Democratic donors, 70 percent of Republican donors, and 74 percent of Independent donors favor VOICE.
The support is pretty even across income levels as well…
Eighty-one percent of those polled that have a household income over $100,000 supported VOICE, and 74 percent of those with a household income less than $100,000 supported VOICE. (This leaves out a group who did not disclose their household income, which still supported VOICE at 65 percent.)
The last 2 legislative sessions, political leaders refused to allow the VOICE bill to come up for a vote. The VOICE legislation would bring voluntary clean elections to Iowa.
The VOICE bill would require candidates to get $5 donations along with their signatures to qualify. All of this money would go into a fund that would be used by candidates that have met the requirements to earn public money. The rest of the money would come from unclaimed property and a check off on your state income taxes.
Under the VOICE bill no taxpayer money would be used unless you want to mark the check off on your state income taxes. Overall, the system would cost around $10 million or less than 1/10 of 1% of the state’s annual budget.
This fall Alaskans will have a chance to take their state back from corruption and vote on a ballot measure that would adopt clean elections in statewide races.
“This is the most important ballot initiative, the most important people’s initiative that we’ve had since statehood. If we get this right, we get our state back,” said Tim June of Alaskans for Clean Elections.
The idea is to offer candidates money from the state to finance their entire campaign.
To qualify, candidates would have to get a certain amount of $5donations and signatures from voters in their district. Once that happens candidates would have to agree to give up any private donations as well as forego out-of-pocket cash expenditures.
“Instead of making a winner determined by who has the most money, Clean Elections levels the playing field by offering candidates an equal amount of funding to whoever they’re running against,” said June.
The measure hopes to limit the power of special interest groups.
“We have always been under pressure from very large multinational corporate interests, industry interest that are constantly trying to change Legislation,” said June.
Alaska would be the eighth state in the country to provide public funding to state candidates.”
There is a similar bill in Iowa that would limit the power of special interest groups called Voter Owned Iowa Clean Elections or VOICE. Like the measure in Alaska, the VOICE bill would require candidates to get $5 donations along with their signatures to qualify. All of this money would go into a fund that would be used by candidates that have met the requirements to earn public money. The rest of the money would come from unclaimed property and a check off on your state income taxes.
Under the VOICE bill no taxpayer money would be used unless you want to mark the check off on your state income taxes. Overall, the system would cost around $10 million or less than 1/10 of 1% of the state’s annual budget.
Unfortunately, the bill has been stalled in committee the last two years by Rep. Jo Oldson. Sen. Gronstal, Rep. Murphy, and Rep. McCarthy. As the fall election approaches, ask your local candidates what their opinion on VOICE is and tell them it is time for Iowans to get their state back from the special interests.
Public Campaign Action Fund, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to improving America’s campaign finance laws, released a new analysis finding that the oil and coal industries spent $427.2 million so far this year of the year to shift public opinion and to capture the eyes, ears, and support of Congress on critical energy issues.
They looked at political contributions, lobbying expenditures, paid advertising, and other political spending to come up with their total.
A total of $37.4 million were given in political contributions. $129 million was spent lobbying Congress and the White House. $208.6 million was spend on paid advertising.
All of this money was spent from January 2008 to June 2008.
After locking up his party’s presidential nomination, Barack Obama’s fundraising operation came roaring back to life in June, generating more than a million dollars on five days, including a whopping $25 million that came in on the last day of the month.
His one-day haul represents nearly half of his monthly total and more than Republican rival John McCain generated for the entire month. During the month, McCain did not have a single day in which he raised a million dollars.
Well-heeled interest groups, businesses and some government agencies spent nearly $195,000 wining and dining lawmakers and their staffers during this year’s legislative session, according to new financial disclosure forms.
Groups ranging from the Iowa State Bar Association and the Greater Des Moines Partnership to Union Pacific spent a total of $194,848 on receptions, dinners and other social events during this year’s session, according to reports filed with the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board.
Some of the groups that spent the most were the Iowa Business Council, The Principal Financial Group, Iowa Gaming Association, the Iowa Wholesale Beer Dealers Association, and Hy-Vee Inc.
Now when you look at some of the big issues that were debated by lawmakers this past session you can see why these groups were so interested. These issues include: changes to collective bargaining, expanding health care to uninsured children, if casinos would be included in the smoking ban or not, and the expansion the bottle bill.
The article goes on to tell about the dramatic influence lobbyists and PAC’s have on lawmakers and helping them get elected.
Disclosure reports for the year ending last June 30 showed that there were 610 groups who paid lobbyists a total of more than $8.5 million to influence lawmakers.
That financial influence was also shown in political action committee disclosures filed this month, with PACs having already given $872,509 to candidates this year.
I don’t think I have heard a better reason for the need for clean elections and campaign finance reform in Iowa. Yet, political leaders refuse to allow the VOICE bill to come up for a vote. The VOICE legislation would bring a voluntary clean elections to Iowa.
I’d love to sit down for a drink with Governor Culver, Sen. Gronstal, Rep. Murphy, and Rep. McCarthy and talk about the benefits of the VOICE bill, but I don’t think I have enough money to afford it.
I’ve sent a strong signal in this campaign by refusing the contributions of registered federal lobbyists and PACs, and today, I’m announcing that going forward, the Democratic National Committee will uphold the same standard and won’t take another dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs. They do not fund my campaign. They will not fund our party. And they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I’m President of the United States.
Ed Fallon responds in this online video to claims that Fallon has violated campaign finance laws by Bush Dog Democrat Leonard Boswell. Fallon is challenging Boswell in a primary in Iowa’s 3rd district.
A misguided reporter from the popular Youtube show “Campaigns of the Rich and Powerful” steps into Team Fallon HQ to investigate the massive wealth of a grassroots campaign. Cuban cigars, Benjamin Franklins, caviar, and diamonds are paving the way for more progressive future… or not.
Fact: 100% of our funds come from people like you. That’s right.
Fact: 0% of Team Fallon’s funds ever are from paid lobbyists, or Political Action Committees with corporate ties and intentions. Nor have they ever been able to write a check to Ed Fallon in his 14 years as a State Rep or in his run for Governor in 2006. Instead Ed always self-imposed a cap on contributions, so that money can never be louder than voters.
Fact: 74% of Boswell’s campaign money from 2007 came from lobbyists and PACs.
Fact: Of the 322 PAC contributions Boswell received last year, the largest percentage came from corporate PACs.
On Wednesday, March 5th, at 8 PM, Democracy Matters will be hosting a panel discussion in Des Moines at Pomerantz Stage, in Olmsted, about money in politics, and clean elections.
Featuring: -Ed Fallon, Iowa Representative and candidate for Congress in the 3rd District -Representative Pam Jochum, from the 27th District -Sherrie Taha, from the Iowa League of Women Voters -Adam Mason, from Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement -Arthur Sanders, Drake Politics Professor
and moderated by Kyle Lobner of Iowa Common Cause. Panelist will share their viewpoints on money in politics and what we can do as ordinary citizens to push for reform in local and national politics.
In a time where running for public office can cost milllions of dollars, it seems almost impossible to take the corrupting influence of money in politics. But clean elections work. Seven states have full public funding systems for at least some of their elected offices: Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Vermont. In addition, studies show that areas that used Clean Elections increased the number of women and minorities who ran for office.
The ads have run on cable TV and are paid for by the Iowa Leadership Council, a group organized under the Internal Revenue Code that allows it to raise unlimited contributions.
The council raised $214,550 in the last six months of 2007, according to IRS records, with the largest donors the Reynolds American tobacco company, which gave $40,000, and MidAmerican Energy Holdings, which donated $25,000.
These ads are applauded by Cyclone Conservative who goes searching for a slogan Republicans can spin in the election. He says that Republicans need to start the attacks now and repeat a slogan over and over again.
The slogan that he comes up with says that Democrats are against property tax relief and against keeping jobs in the state. This is absolutely ridiculous. He makes it sound like Democrats want all Iowans to be unemployed and want to force them to hand over all of their money in property taxes.
After running on slogans like “God, Gays, and Guns” for years now, Republicans should realize by now that they no longer are working. Republicans need to forget the slogans and focus on ideas. All of their ideas have run there course and now what is left, is an empty party that is only able to push wedge issues, while they attempt to come up with more meaningless slogans.
Popular Progressive had this post over the weekend asking if Voter Owned Iowa Clean Elections or VOICE will be heard during this session.
He also had a link to an interview with Adam Mason from Iowa CCI about VOICE.
What difference would Clean Elections make in IOWA, especially in reference to the issues you work on at ICCI?
Money talks less, and people talk more. The hope is that, with voter education, voter participation will be increased and to restore faith in government, and to reaffirm that the government is by the people and for the people. With Clean Elections, legislators can focus on constituents. In reference to farm factories, local people can have control of factory farms, giving them the chance to approve or deny farm factory licenses, where now legislators are backing out of their promise to give local control over factory farms because they fear the loss of their campaign contributions from factory farm owners and corporate interest wins, grassroots people lose. With Clean Elections, law makers would not have to rely on special interest money.
I have been disappointed about the lack of discussion about VOICE and clean elections. Before the caucuses, I heard over and over again from people on both sides about the ridiculous amounts of money candidates were spending on Presidential campaigns. Now is the time to have the debate.
