Public financing of campaigns is best solution

Published: Friday, July 18, 2008 12:05 a.m. MDT
E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
This is a column about the growing expenses of federal and state campaigns and one solution that will open up the election process and reduce what I see as a growing evil among us — special interest money.

It is a column that will be opposed by about every elected official in Utah (and many other states) and many Utahns, as well.

In looking over the recent filings by the U.S. Congress candidates and candidates for the Utah Legislature, fellow reporter Lee Davidson and I couldn't help but notice not only the increasing fundraising many candidates are conducting but also the number of candidates who are self-funding their races.

There is a lot of debt being taken on by candidates as they write themselves campaign checks, hoping someday to pay themselves back.

In recent years a number of congressional candidates spent a lot of their own cash on their campaigns, only to lose: David Leavitt, $236,208; LaVar Christensen, $575,600; Steve Thompson, $32,207; Steve Olsen, $32,442; John Jacob, $624,145; and Tim Bridgewater, $514,635.

GOP 2nd District candidate Bill Dew is still in his race this year, and he's loaned his campaign $349,000 already.

Story continues below
Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, rang up $1.67 million in loans to himself before he forgave that debt in the early 2000s. So Cannon just lost that money. Since then Cannon again loaned his campaign $138,000, which he still owes. Since Cannon, a millionaire, lost the June GOP primary to Jason Chaffetz, it is unlikely he will be able to raise money to pay himself back.

In fact, it's unlikely any of the self-loaners listed above will be able to raise money and pay themselves back. (A political note here: Chaffetz managed to beat Cannon without loaning his campaign any money; Chaffetz gave his campaign around $10,000, which he can't recover. Chaffetz's campaign is debt free.)

A number of legislative candidates are also loaning their campaigns money. If they win election, the special interest money tree kicks in, and in most cases sitting legislators can raise enough money — especially over several elections — to pay themselves back, should they choose.

Some lawmakers just write off their first campaign loans. Others wait until they finally leave office, and then with the leftover money in their campaign account repay themselves. (Under Utah's lax campaign finance laws, legislators can do anything legal with their campaign funds, even just give it to themselves.)

And incumbent lawmakers usually have little trouble raising enough money to run for re-election — in fact, a number of legislators raise money only from special interest groups and lobbyists, with none of their constituents contributing to their races. Accordingly, if some lawmakers pay back their own campaign loans, they are doing it with special interest and lobbyist money — bringing a whole new level of conflict of interest issues to the forefront.

Recent comments

We need more people that are willing to work with volunteers like...

arc | July 21, 2008 at 12:41 a.m.

Public financing of campaigns continues to be a horrible idea. While...

Bryan Kingsford | July 20, 2008 at 8:13 a.m.

Bob, this is a well-done column. For those who have criticized,...

Well done | July 19, 2008 at 8:54 a.m.