Vitali reintroduces campaign financing bill

HARRISBURG, June 8 – As the amount of campaign money raised and spent by state-level candidates and special interest groups in Pennsylvania – and its impact on politics and policy in the state – increases, state Rep. Greg Vitali said Pennsylvania needs comprehensive campaign finance reform legislation more than ever.

Today, Vitali reintroduced legislation – the Pennsylvania Gubernatorial Public Financing Act – that he said would take an important first step in returning control of the state’s elections to the voters and returning the focus of those elections to the issues.

“In the past two years, campaign finance reform has become a national issue with passage of the McCain-Feingold law and the attempts by the national parties and special interest groups to circumnavigate that law," Vitali said. “But nowhere is the issue more important than here in Pennsylvania, a state which has never had meaningful campaign finance laws in the first place.”

Vitali's Pennsylvania Gubernatorial Public Financing Act (H.B. 2684) would establish a public financing system for governor and lieutenant governor candidates in primary and general election races. Candidates for governor who agree to voluntary spending limits could receive up to $5.5 million in public financing for their primary campaign, and up to $8.5 million for the general election campaign.

Gubernatorial candidates who participate would be limited to spending $9 million in the primary election and $13 million in the general election. Individuals and political action committees could contribute no more than $2,500 to a candidate in the primary election and another $2,500 to a candidate in the general election.

The program would be funded by a voluntary $5 check-off on state Personal Income Tax forms and a General Fund budget appropriation.

“A similar system in New Jersey has led to two consecutive gubernatorial elections in which the race was decided by less than 1 percentage point, and where a vigorous debate on the issues was at the center of the campaign,” Vitali said. “Here in Pennsylvania, our gubernatorial races are becoming less competitive, not more, and our elections campaigns are becoming more of a mad dash for special interest cash than a debate about the issues.” 

In 1978, the last year that Pennsylvania made any significant update to its campaign finance laws, former Gov. Richard Thornburgh spent about $8 million to get elected. By 1994, Gov. Tom Ridge spent about $14 million to get elected to his first term, and in 2002, Gov. Ed Rendell raised and spent $37 million.

“State records show that the bulk of this ballooning campaign money is coming from large contributions by well-financed interest groups, not $50 and $200 contributions from average Pennsylvanians,” Vitali said. “Single donations of $50,000, $100,000 and even more are becoming more common.

Vitali said In a system where winning an election is so strongly tied to ability to raise money, it only stands to reason that candidates will be more beholden to the special interest groups that can provide these huge contributions, and less attentive to the average Pennsylvania resident.

“With Pennsylvania poised to decide some of the most crucial issues of the past few decades – school funding and taxation; expanded gambling; huge economic and community revitalization initiatives; and environmental cleanup – we cannot afford to have the people making these decisions talking only to – and listening only to – the people who can show them the most money,” he said.

“Without meaningful campaign finance reform – and the kick-start the Gubernatorial Public Financing Act would provide in the state’s most important race – we risk permanently shutting voters out of the process, and disqualifying the hundreds of qualified candidates for governor, lieutenant governor and other state-level offices who are not plugged in to the big money sources.”

###mjh/2004/bt
l:\writers\releases\gubfinance04.166