Our View: Want campaign spending limits? Then speak up
Five years after the U.S. Supreme Court began issuing decisions opening the way for increased and sometimes invisible spending on campaigns, the Federal Election Commission is considering new rules governing public disclosure of campaign money.
This is where you come in.
The six-member Federal Election Commission is asking the public to comment about rules governing whether voters should know which interests are spending how much to influence their votes.
The Federal Election Commission is one of the more dysfunctional agencies in Washington. It splits 3-3 on virtually every issue of significance related to campaign disclosure. But in a moment of clarity in October, the commission agreed to ask the public what it thinks on the most pressing issue before it: campaign finance disclosure. The deadline for commenting is Jan. 15. A hearing is set for Feb. 11 in Washington.
This being the Federal Election Commission, nothing is easy. Finding the location on the website where you can file comments is no small feat.
Commissioners Steven T. Walther, Ellen L. Weintraub and Ann Ravel are going out of their way to encourage public comment, including traveling the country trying to generate interest.
“We think it is essential to hear from anyone who cares about money in politics – especially citizens and campaign volunteers who have an equal stake in making our democracy work,” the three said in a statement. “We know there is growing public concern about the deluge of undisclosed spending to sway our votes. We share this concern. … Outside spending by groups that hide their donors increased from just $5 million 2006 to more than $300 million in 2012.
“Given this dramatic increase, the commission should consider based on public comments and testimony how to strengthen its disclosure rules so that voters know who is behind the messages intended to influence their votes.”
Ravel, the former chair of the California Fair Political Practices Commission, said the Federal Election Commission has received more than 3,000 comments. We hope that by Jan. 15 there will be many times that number.
As it opened the way for more spending on campaigns earlier this year, the Supreme Court noted that “disclosure offers much more robust protections against corruption” because campaign spending reports can be available on the FEC’s website almost immediately.
“Given these developments in modern technology, what regulatory changes or other steps should the commission take to further improve its collection and presentation of campaign finance data?” the commission asked as it requested public comments.
No matter their party or political persuasion, voters should want to know the identities of contributors who are funding insipid TV ads, scurrilous mailers, annoying robocalls and other propaganda designed to sway their votes.
It doesn’t mean you will ignore their message, but you can take it with a large dose of salt if you know the sender.
The concept of asking the public – not just interested parties – for its opinion is somewhat novel in Washington, D.C. We believe it should be encouraged. Instead of grousing about how big money controls elections, voters should offer their two cents. Who knows? It might influence the decision in a way that would be good for democracy.
This story was originally published December 3, 2014 at 3:03 PM with the headline "Our View: Want campaign spending limits? Then speak up."