Just 18 months removed from the Randall v. Sorrell decision overturning Vermont’s contribution limits and less than 6 months from failing to override a gubernatorial veto of a similar bill, the Vermont legislature appears intent on trying yet again to pass a campaign finance bill that imposes severe contribution limits.
The Burlington Free Press reports that this year’s bill is expected to closely mirror the vetoed 2007 bill. Despite the Supreme Court declaring the $200 contribution limits for state representative races were too low, the 2007 bill included contribution limits to state representative races of just $250.
But last year, CCP noted that "The $50 increase for contributions to state representative candidates is not actually as paltry as it sounds. When one lays the bill side-by-side with Justice Breyer’s plurality opinion in Randall, it’s clear that the former was crafted to address specifically the concerns in the latter. Among these concerns were:
- Limits under the old law were not indexed for inflation
- Identical limits applied to individuals and political parties
- Limits applied per cycle rather than per election
The new bill addresses each of these. Limits are indexed to inflation, and the limits on political parties have been raised significantly. Perhaps more importantly, the new bill would allow contributors to donate up to the limit in both the primary and general elections, effectively raising the contribution limit from $200/cycle to $500/cycle.
This new bill will please the Justice Breyers of the world, but it is unlikely to please many others (certainly not the Scalias and Thomases). "
In his veto message last year, Governor Jim Douglas expressed concern that the "proposed individual and party contribution limits extend a form of political protection to incumbents, establish an unfair and nearly insurmountable obstacle for challengers and would be a particular disadvantage to those of modest means who are unable to fund their own campaign."
Douglas continued, noting that at "the statewide level, the political protection for down-ticket incumbents is very problematic. The contribution limits for these statewide offices are lower than those imposed for candidates for governor, even though the candidates must cover the same geographical area and have to reach the same number of voters. Additionally, increased restrictions on support for these candidates will make it extraordinarily difficult for a Vermonter who wishes to seek these public offices but who does not have significant personal wealth to mount a credible statewide campaign."
