Study undermines key claims about “Clean Elections”

Posted on August 6, 2008

The Center for Competitive Politics (CCP) released a study today that undermines claims about the ability of "Clean Elections" to reduce the importance of interest groups in the political process.

CCP research also found that perceptions about what motivates an elected official's vote have little to do with how a candidate's campaign is financed.

"Members of organized interest groups remain instrumental in providing support to candidates participating in these taxpayer-funded political campaign schemes," said CCP President Sean Parnell. "Moreover, replacing private, voluntary contributions with taxpayer dollars had little impact on the public's perception of whether or not their elected officials are responsive to constituent needs."

CCP discovered that members of interest groups provided the majority of "qualifying contributions" for candidates participating in the 2007 ‘Clean Elections' pilot project. 

The New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) was the most frequently represented interest group among contributors. NJEA members made up more than one quarter of all contributors.

Members of the National Rifle Association (NRA) were the top givers to Republican candidates in the 24^th district, making up nearly one-third of all donors in that district.  NRA members also provided 17.9 percent of contributions to Republicans in the 14^th District.

Other interest groups whose members provided significant support included New Jersey Right to Life (18.1 percent to Republicans in the 24^th District), NARAL Pro-Choice New Jersey (16.7 percent to Democrats in the 14^th District), the Communications Workers of America (16.7 percent to Republicans in the 14^th District), and the Sierra Club (15.6 percent to Democrats in the 24^th District).

"Candidates continued to rely on interest group members to raise the needed small contributions," Parnell said. "It's hard to imagine an elected official wouldn't be grateful to the NJEA, NRA, or any other group who helped them to qualify for more than $500,000 in taxpayer funds."

CCP's research also found that the public's perception about what motivates the way a legislator votes is driven primarily by individuals' own partisanship and ideology.

"Most concerns and charges of undue influence stem from partisan and ideological disagreements," Parnell observed. "There's nothing that taxpayer-funded political campaigns can do to prevent some citizens from feeling disgruntled about their elected officials' actions."

"Taxpayer-funded political campaigns can't improve public perception because most discontent is driven by ideological and partisan differences that aren't going away," Parnell concluded.

The study's findings can be found by following this link: http://www.campaignfreedom.org/docLib/20080806_NJ_Findings.pdf