State House looks to campaign finance bill after court ruling

Until a U.S. Supreme Court case two years ago struck down a state law as violating free speech, Vermont had the lowest cap on financial donations to politicians.

But advocates for campaign finance reform are back in the state House and Senate –where Democrats hold a strong majority. The House passed a less restrictive bill last month that is now sitting in a Senate committee.

The bill limits the amount of money state political parties can contribute to a candidate during an election. It would also restrict contributions from individual donors to candidates at $1,000 for governor and other state offices, $500 for state Senate and $250 for state Representatives.

The aim of the bill, according to sponsor Sen. Jeannette White (D-Windham), is to remove the influence money could play in Vermont politics.

“Money does play an influence on all of us,” Sen. White said in an e-mail. “It might provide greater access to a candidate. We may not have corruption in the state in our elections but this is seen as a preventative measure.”

Under current contributions laws, Vermont political parties are entitled to make unlimited donations to campaigns. This lenience can take focus away from a state party’s responsibilities, according to Jill Krowinski, director of the Vermont Democratic Party.

“[This bill] will ensure that all our candidates have to reach out to a wider range of Vermonters for support,” she said. “[It] will allow political parties to engage in the sort of grassroots activities that strengthen our democracy, like knocking on doors, making phone calls.”

But critics, like Vermont GOP chairman Rob Roper, said that if this bill passes money would instead be filtering into the pocket books of other tax-exempt advocacy groups like 527s.

“The money that exists in politics wouldn’t decrease,” he said. “Instead it drives money into the hands of groups that don’t have to be transparent—it’s the very definition of corruption.”

If passed, parties now would have to limit contributions to candidates under these terms: $30,000 for a gubernatorial candidate, $15,000 for lieutenant governor and $5,000 for secretary of state, attorney general and other state-held offices.

The bill, however, is much less restrictive than the one struck down by the Supreme Court in 2006. Known as Act 64, the bill signed into law by former Governor Howard Dean in 1997, set contributions limits to candidates for local office and to the House at $200 from a single source throughout the entire 2-year election cycle, $300 for candidates running for state Senate and $400 for gubernatorial candidates.

Political action committees and political parties were also limited to these restrictions.

But Roper said even imposing less restrictive limits would help protect the incumbent because it limits money both the challenger and the incumbent can raise from independent donors.

Still, some candidates are fine with this.

“I think it could have a strong impact on the governor’s race and I support it,” said Progressive candidate Anthony Pollina, who so far is the only announced candidate besides Gov. Douglas. “What this bill would do is force them to use less money or rely more on local donors—that’s good.”

In the 2006 gubernatorial election, the Vermont Democratic Party donated a total of $10,656 to its candidate, Scudder Parker, according to itemized reports filed by Parker in October of 2006; whereas, the Vermont GOP donated $28,582 to Gov. Douglas according to reports filed in August of 2006. With coffers of nearly a million dollars, Gov. Douglas out-raised Parker by almost $180,000 in 2006.

Even in bordering Massachusetts, where party donations to candidates are capped at $3,000 per year, there is a loophole.

Political party donations may be capped, but the parties are allowed to give unlimited in-kind contributions, generally gifts used to cover expenses, said Pam Wilmot, director of Mass. Common Cause, a non-partisan good-government organization.

Though Vermont currently includes in-kind contributions in contribution limits, and many critics of the new bill say that corruption doesn’t exist in Vermont politics, Wilmot said the whole issue needs to be viewed holistically.

“It isn’t actual corruption that most campaign finance laws attempt to address,” she said. “It’s the appearance thereof.”