Public Financing
Public funding of political campaigns: no proposed reform would work better to reduce the power of big money in American elections and restore confidence in American democracy. Public financing limits the influence of big money campaign donations, encouraging candidates with limited resources to run for office. Plus, it frees politicians from the burden and distraction involved in constant fundraising.
One clear way forward on public financing is a small donor matching funds system. A resounding success in New York City and other states and cities around the country, these programs encourage small donor outreach by matching donations up to a specified low-dollar amount. New York City’s program, for example, enjoys robust participation by serious, credible candidates and has dramatically expanded the number of New Yorkers who contribute to electoral campaigns as small donors.
The Brennan Center works with policy makers and activists interested in decreasing the power of big money in elections and increasing the impact each individual citizen has at the polls. Working on the federal, state and local levels, we help draft and enact legislation, provide legal analysis, and assist in the defense of campaign finance laws when they are challenged in court, such as in Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett.
Recently, the Brennan Center helped Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) draft the "Fair Elections Now Act," a bill that would create a public financing system for congressional elections. We also work on the state level, helping draft public financing legislation tailored to local interests and needs. We successfully beat back a challenge to the public financing system in Connecticut and are working on a case in Maine. Every year, the Center also releases a guide to drafting state and local campaign finance laws.
Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett
The Brennan Center, with its pro bono partner, defended the Arizona Clean Elections law in front of the Supreme Court in Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett, a case challenging one provision of Arizona’s public financing system—triggered matching funds.
Wisconsin Right to Life PAC v. Michael Brennan
A federal district court in Wisconsin upheld the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s judicial public financing program. In doing so, the court found no merit to plaintiffs’ claims that the law infringed on the free speech rights of Wisconsin residents and political organizations, or their ability to participate vocally in the state’s judicial elections.
Respect Maine PAC. v. Walter McKee
Representing eight state legislative candidates and the Maine Citizens for Clean Elections, the Brennan Center filed a brief opposing an eleventh-hour motion to enjoin numerous parts of Maine's campaign finance system before the November elections. Plaintiffs' request to enjoin trigger provisions, disclosure provisions, and gubernatorial contribution limits has been denied three times: by Justice Stephen Breyer, by a unanimous panel of the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and by the Maine District Court. It was only then that plaintiffs made a renewed application for emergency writ of injunction to Supreme Court Justice Kennedy, a highly unusual move that has not been granted for the past twenty years. On October 21, 2010 the Brennan Center filed its Opposition to Plaintiffs' Application for a Writ of Injunction.
A roundup with the latest news highlighting the corrosive nature of money in New York State politics — and the need for public financing and robust campaign finance reform.
Former Representatives Voice Support for Public Financing
Two former New York congressman voiced their support for Governor Cuomo's plan to enact public financing in the state.
Governor Reaffirms Commitment to Public Financing
Governor Andrew Cuomo reaffirmed his commitment to clean up Albany during his State of the State address.
Illustrations by Risko
Joint Statement on Governor Cuomo’s State of the State Address
In yesterday's State of the State Address, Governor Andrew Cuomo vowed to lead the push for what could become the most important reform in the nation in 2012: reducing the massive influence of big money in our political system through public financing of elections for New York State.
Brennan Center Praises Cuomo’s Support of Public Financing
Following Governor Andrew Cuomo’s State of the State address, the Brennan Center released this statement from Executive Director Michael Waldman.
Supreme Court Strikes Down “Trigger” Funds, But Public Financing Remains Constitutional
The Brennan Center for Justice defended Arizona's campaign finance law before the Supreme Court with its pro bono counsel Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP. The Center released the following statement from Executive Director Michael Waldman on the Supreme Court’s decision in McComish v. Bennett.
Letter to Governor Cuomo Calling for Fair Elections in New York State
Coalition of good government, civil rights, environmental, labor, business, religious and grassroots community organizations urge Governor Cuomo to create a public campaign financing program for New York State.
Letter to U.S. House of Representatives Urging Opposition to H.R. 3463
The Brennan Center for Justice submitted a letter to members of the U.S. House of Representatives urging them to oppose a bill that would terminate the Election Assistance Commission and end the presidential public financing system.
Groups Urge Senator Durbin to Block Repeal of Presidential Public Financing
Congressional opponents may try to repeal the presidential public financing system. The Brennan Center for Justice, along with numerous other groups, wrote a letter to Senator Dick Durbin urging him to block any repeal effort.
Growing Backlash Against ‘Citizens United’
We can expect citizens and courts to continue to rally against the case until it ceases to be the law of the land.
Minimizing Special-Interest Power by Maximizing Participation
Fighting back against restrictive voting-rights laws and empowering small donors can help reclaim elections.
N.C. Should Fight to Keep Publicly Funded Judicial Campaigns
Judicial elections are different than legislative races, which is why North Carolina should maintain and strengthen its judicial public financing program as a vital bulwark against improper influence.