Fear mongering by Common Cause

Published on April 4, 2008
by Laura Renz

File Under: "Clean" Elections, Faulty Assumptions

At an event put on by Georgetown University's "Forum for the Study of Democracy and Autocracy" this week entitled "Assessing the State of Democracy in America: Is This the Best We Can Be?" several panelists spoke on the current state of our election processes and on political reform.  A representative from Common Cause Maryland wisely pointed out that the call for reform too often comes in the heat of political battle, and more objective views are needed for long lasting, valuable reform. 

In that vein, we take issue with Common Cause's current promotion of the clean elections bill in Maryland.  Rather than promote the bill on its merits, Common Cause has teamed up with another group, Progressive Maryland, to instead promote a series of ads designed to mislead voters.

If a clean elections regime is truly the solution to Maryland's ills, the bill would stand on its own merit and Common Cause and Progressive Maryland could sell it to the state's voters without resorting to scare tactics and falsehoods.  Even more egregious, however, is their manipulation of the facts in search of a "bad guy" special interest. 

The ad shows a couple receiving their electric bill and to their dismay (as any person who owns or rents a home already knows) the bill is clearly very high.  What the ad claims, though, is that this is simply the result of Maryland's deregulation of electricity in response to the campaign contributions of utility companies - "more than $1 million since 1999" - to state legislators.  The solution to this ill, according to the ad, which bears the names of sponsors Common Cause and Progressive Maryland, is publically financed elections.

The National Institute on Money in State Politics released a report in May 2007 detailing the total amount of money that energy interests had given to state legislatures between 2003 and 2006.  Maryland's total contributions rank it 23^rd amongst the 50 states.  It is also worth noting that the total number reported by the Institute on Money in State Politics is $650,808.  Why is it then that the ads run by Progressive Maryland date back almost a decade ago to 1999 and claim the total is over $1 million dollars?  One can only assume that the figures are intended to elicit an emotional response from voters struggling with financial concerns.

It is clear that Common Cause Maryland does not practice what it preaches when it comes to taking the necessary steps to achieve viable political reform.  Instead, it blatantly misrepresents facts and overtly suggests that the utilities lobby has bribed the entire Maryland Legislature.  Without evidence of such a crime, such an allegation is irresponsible. 

Clean elections program in other states have not met their intended goals.  Instead they have unnecessarily restricted the freedom of individuals in those states to contribute to politicians with whom they have shared values and priorities.  If these programs' efficacy was proven, as Common Cause Maryland would have us believe, it is unlikely the organization would be forced to resort to such a primitive advocacy strategy.