At a high point in his State of the State speech early this year, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo called for the public financing of election campaigns. He rightly recognized it as a way to help our state legislators clean up their collective act and limit the corrosive influence of money on their decisions. His remarks were met with a round of applause, and then more dithering from the Republican-led State Senate, which has behaved as though it wants the public financing idea to go away.
A few states, including Wisconsin, attempted to curb the influence of money and politics on judicial decisions by including nonpartisan elections and public financing of campaigns in their system of judicial selection. Despite these reforms, we posit a relationship between the campaign contributions by attorneys to an individual judge and the vote of that individual judge over a ten-year period of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. We examine the effects of attorneys' contributions on votes in a number of areas of law. The data for this article, obtained from the National Institute for Money in Politics, include the donations by attorneys to the judges of the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the decisions those judges made post-contributions. We find little evidence to support a systematic relatio...
As we watch Washington lawmakers wallow in the trough of lobbyist dollars, it's gratifying to know that we don't have that problem in Connecticut. To the credit of our citizens, Connecticut enacted legislation providing public financing of election campaigns. We insulated our legislators from the corrupting campaign contributions of lobbyists. But, this safeguard might be eliminated very soon. Our system of public campaign financing has been challenged in court, and if the legislature doesn't hold a special session now, the campaign system will drop dead. There's a provision that nullifies the public funding of candidates if the law is thrown in doubt.
This is a column about the growing expenses of federal and state campaigns and one solution that will open up the election process and reduce what I see as a growing evil among us -- special interest money. It is a column that will be opposed by about every elected official in Utah (and many other states) and many Utahns, as well.
The consensus reaction by readers to my last few columns on the subject of corruption and its pervasive effect on our political culture and the mixed economy that produces it appears to be, "Prosecute the hell out of them. As I have pointed out before, however, this strategy is problematical at best in our representative democracy, which is and will continue to be privately financed unless the American people have a sharp change of mind about the value of public financing of political campaigns.
News Advisory: -- Activists To Gather to Seize the Moment!: a National Activists Conference on the Public Financing of Political Campaigns
WASHINGTON - The House on Thursday passed a bill to end the public financing of presidential campaigns. It would dismantle a system set up after the Watergate scandal of the 1970s that has been overshadowed in recent years by the huge sums of private money pouring into elections. The bill would remove from income tax forms the check-off box where taxpayers can voluntarily steer $3 into a fund for presidential primaries and general elections. The Republican-backed measure passed 235-190 on a nearly party-line vote.
If voters choose to permanently scrap public financing for campaigns in November 2012, proponents of higher campaign contribution limits may find themselves trying to answer a tricky question: How do you further the intent of a law that no longer exists? They're hoping they don't have to find out.
President Obama and Mitt Romney agree on at least one way to reduce federal spending: Both candidates have decided to forgo public funds to finance their campaigns. It marks the first time that the major candidates have refused taxpayers cash from start to finish, and likely signals the end of "public financing," the system of taxpayer-funded campaigns designed to separate potentially corrupting special interests from presidential elections.
By Jennifer Swift jswift@nhregister.com @NHRswift on Twitter NEW HAVEN -- While Alderman Justin Elicker and state Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield have signed on for public financing of their mayoral campaigns from the city's Democracy Fund, Holder-Winfield is asking all candidates to pledge their participation, and the Board of Aldermen has a resolution before it urging the same.
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
© Copyright 2013, vLex. All Rights Reserved.
Contents in vLex United States
Explore vLex
For Professionals
For Partners
Company
Other interesting searches:
Hal Vogel | brocknie bray | Alaska Department Of Transportation And Public Facilities | Finanzas de | Bank Leu | derecho difamacion e injuria penal | transparencia | Articulo 27 | geografia humana | negociacion efectiva
