| Clean Elections |
Article Index for Clean |
Website Links For Clean |
Information AboutClean Elections |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT CLEAN ELECTIONS | |
| elections in the united states | |
|
Under a Clean Elections system, candidates hoping to receive public financing must collect a certain number of small "qualifying contributions" (often as little as $5) from registered voters. In return, they are paid a flat sum by the government to run their campaigns, and agree not to raise money from private sources. Candidates who are outspent by privately-funded opponents may receive additional public matching funds. Because the system is voluntary, it appears not to run afoul of the United States Supreme Court 's '' Buckley V. Valeo '' decision, which struck down mandatory spending limits as an unconstitutional restriction on Free Speech . Comprehensive Clean Elections systems have been in effect in Arizona and Maine for several years. Not surprisingly, most candidates take the subsidies rather than compete under the resulting handicap of raising voluntary contributions. In Maine , an overwhelming majority (3/4) of state legislators take the government money. In Arizona , the same is true of a majority of the state house, as well as the current Governor ( Janet Napolitano ). At the Federal level, Senator Russ Feingold is a supporter. In the 2008 Presidential Campaign , John Edwards has also expressed support. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CLEAN ELECTIONS AND TRADITIONAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM Clean Elections can be considered a type of Campaign Finance Reform . Clean Elections differs from more traditional reform proposals, however, in a number of important ways:
EFFECTIVENESS OF CLEAN ELECTIONS Studies by various ideological advocacy groups have found that Clean Elections are effective or ineffective largely in accordance with the position the sponsoring organization has taken on the question. The most important independent study of clean elections is one undertaken by the nonpartisan General Accounting Office pursuant to a provision in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (also known as "McCain-Feingold"). The study, of Clean Elections programs in Arizona and Maine, concluded that more experience was required before any final judgments could be made on the effectiveness of the system. However,it found no short term benefits from clean elections in either of the two states. ( {Link without Title} ) SUPPORTERS OF CLEAN ELECTIONS
EXTERNAL LINKS Legislation
Studies
Related organizations
Press coverage
|
|
|