Have a question or issue in campaign law? Contact us and we'll try to answer you. Enter your e-mail below:
Learn more about...
Interested in a specific subject? Click here to browse our blog by subject area.
Blog Roll
AFJ Nonprofit Advocacy Blog
Beltway Blogroll
Campaign Legal Center blog
Cato Unbound
Common Cause Blog
Division of Labour
First Amendment Center
Going to the Mat
Instapundit.com
The Lonely Centrist
Michael Barone
More Soft Money Hard Law (Bob Bauer)
Political Activity Law
Public Citizen WatchdogBlog
RedState
Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog
Sabato's Crystal Ball
The Volokh Conspiracy
Votelaw
|
|
CCP letter in the Philadelphia Inquirer
Published on June 15, 2007
Associate director Paul Sherman's letter to the Philadelphia Inquirer:
Campaign funding
In Monday's editorial "Campaign Finance Proposal: Vote for fairness," The Inquirer advocates a host of new regulations for Pennsylvania. But the solutions you suggest are misguided if you want more competitive elections and a more responsive legislature.
Stricter contribution limits won't eliminate the "unfair advantage" of incumbency; it will make it worse. Since limits were first enacted at the federal level, the number of successful challenger campaigns has plummeted by 50 percent.
You also partly blame the current system "for a legislature that grew out of touch with the public." But consider Virginia, which has no contribution limits and has been rated the best-governed state in the country by Governing magazine.
The Founders knew long ago what makes government responsive to its citizens: the unfettered ability to engage in robust political debate. Your prescriptions would clamp down on the money necessary to fund that debate, crippling challengers and further entrenching incumbents.
Paul Sherman
Associate director
Center for Competitive Politics
Arlington, Va.
