Public Financing

Once again, The Sun urges the institution of public campaign financing, implying that if such a plan were instituted, private campaign contributions would disappear and we'd all live happily ever after ("Appearance of conflict," Nov. 29). Nothing could be further from the truth. For one thing, there is that pesky First Amendment. For another, as our president demonstrated in his 2008 campaign, if you have enough private contributions, you can finance a campaign very nicely without utilizing public financing.

Once again, the Sun is advocating public financing of Maryland political campaigns. ("Limited thinking," Jan. 18). Forget it! The taxpayer is not going to vote an increase in the already excessive amount of money taken from his hard earned paycheck to finance redundant TV ads for a government that is dysfunctional. The same editorial is against term limits for Baltimore County Council members because elected officials "will be less experienced. " What are they experienced at - corruption and rubber-stamping anything Governor Tax wants?

[XXXXX] WASHINGTON -- Tired of politics as usual and sickened by corruption and ethics scandals, voters gave the next Congress an unmistakable mandate: Clean up your act. Forty-two percent of voters said corruption was the single most important factor in determining whom to vote for, according to a major exit poll. These "anti-corruption" voters chose Democrats over Republicans by 60 percent to 38 percent. To put this into context, corruption ranked ahead of terrorism (40 percent), the economy (39 percent)

Will Maryland voters see super PAC money spent here to influence the outcome of an election in 2012? If a certain congressional race gets close - say, the general election in the reshaped Sixth District - it's possible, even likely. Only two of the state's eight House seats are Republican. With the new Sixth in danger of slipping to the Democrats, some fat-cat super PAC might decide to throw money into advertising on behalf of the Republican candidate. Vice-versa if the Democrat needs an edge.

WASHINGTON -- Of all the bad ideas in the Republican budget proposals -- and there are plenty -- the least defensible may be their plan to kill the public financing of presidential election campaigns.The system was put in place 20 years ago as a response to Watergate and the abuses that had developed in the financing of campaigns -- most particularly the influence enjoyed by a few fat cats who financed candidates with multimillion-dollar contributions.Now, in the name of deficit reduction, the Republicans intend to scuttle the system -- and open the door once again to another generation of influence-seekers.

WASHINGTON -- House Democrats fired a new campaign season salvo at the GOP yesterday, unveiling their latest proposal to overhaul the manner in which political campaigns are financed.The plan, which would provide public financing for congressional candidates who agreed to observe voluntary spending limits, echoed proposals unsuccessfully advanced by Democrats throughout the past half-decade.But yesterday's announcement was tailored to capitalize on the recent wave of public discontent with Congress -- a discontent that has launched a national drive for mandatory term limits on congressional careers.

Supporters of Republican gubernatorial candidate Ellen R. Sauerbrey who want to give money to her campaign are getting the most unexpected response in politics: No thanks.Mrs. Sauerbrey is the first candidate in Maryland to run a general election campaign using public financing, and sometime next week she will receive a check for $997,800 in state funds.But under the law, Mrs. Sauerbrey can spend no more than that on her campaign.That means she is suggesting would-be contributors look elsewhere.

THERE'S a $3 million jackpot in Maryland's treasury waiting to be tapped, but only candidates for governor need apply.For the first time since the tax checkoff for public financing of political campaigns was authorized in the post-Watergate reform frenzy, the state will hand out money to gubernatorial candidates and their running mates for lieutenant governor who agree to legally imposed spending limits.The money has been held in escrow, gathering interest for more than 20 years because succeeding General Assemblys couldn't agree on how to allocate the funds.

Sen. Barack Obama's decision to become the first presidential candidate to walk away from public financing of his campaign is understandable but disappointing. He has been remarkably successful in using the Internet to amass millions in small donations. But the flood of private money into national political campaigns in recent years and his decision to abandon efforts to reach an agreement with Sen. John McCain to use public funding is a major disappointment for those struggling to restrain the pernicious influence of special interests in American politics.

A proposal for public financing of General Assembly campaigns appears dead this year after a fiery debate in the Maryland Senate over the idea of using taxpayer dollars for political activities. Senators made several changes to the bill, argued over its necessity and complained that the full implications were unclear before voting, 27-20, Wednesday to send the bill back to committee. The procedural move means that further work on the bill is unlikely this legislative session, which ends in less than three weeks.

Just stop proposing public financing of political campaigns ("Appearance of conflict," Nov. 29). It's not going to happen in this lifetime. People will not vote to have more of their paychecks taken and wasted to purchase obnoxious, overused TV ads for dysfunctional candidates. Promote a referendum on term limits. That will lessen the conflicts. Dan Griffin, Perry Hall

Once again, The Sun urges the institution of public campaign financing, implying that if such a plan were instituted, private campaign contributions would disappear and we'd all live happily ever after ("Appearance of conflict," Nov. 29). Nothing could be further from the truth. For one thing, there is that pesky First Amendment. For another, as our president demonstrated in his 2008 campaign, if you have enough private contributions, you can finance a campaign very nicely without utilizing public financing.

I agree that Occupy Wall Street needs to grow up to become the true anti-tea party it should be ("Time to grow up," Nov. 17). It needs to copy the highly successful, and savvy David Koch political tactics of the tea party itself. It needs to organize nationally and flood all political town hall meetings from now on with Occupy folks who shout the tea party down. It needs to stage the largest protests on the Mall and the Capitol steps in history, demonstrations dwarfing those of the tea party.

Imagine a presidential election in which each candidate was limited to spending the same amount of money to finance their campaigns. The money would come from taxpayers, but it would be money well-spent. Candidates having to ask for campaign cash always have to "pay the piper" down the road. Publicly financed campaigns would free candidates of their reliance on huge contributions from big business and wealthy individuals. Those companies and individuals are only thinking of how to line their own pockets once their candidate wins.

The Supreme Court's assault on efforts to limit the toxic effect of money on elections in this country continued this week with the decision to strike down an important provision of Arizona's public financing of elections. Under the Arizona law, candidates who elected to have their campaigns publicly financed were eligible for additional so-called "trigger" funds if their privately financed opponents' fundraising exceeded a certain amount. The effort was to keep the playing field somewhat level.

Sen. Andy Harris has put his endorsement on the need for a Constitutional Ammendment to change the length of terms for our elected representatives ("Idea of term limits for Congress gets new wave of support," March 30). Good for him! Our country is trapped in a system of elections that doesn't work for the citizens, a system that leads to corruption at all levels of government, and to the current "Imperial" nature of the life of the federal office holders who are very happy with their lifestyle and who protect their position with little regard for their hometown constituency.

Howard County Executive Charles I. Ecker's underdog candidacy for governor ran into a new obstacle yesterday as he conceded that his campaign would not raise enough money to qualify for public financing.Ecker vowed to continue his struggle to wrest the Republican nomination over the heavily favored Ellen R. Sauerbrey."Sure, I've got a serious chance -- with or without the financing," Ecker said.Neither Ecker nor campaign officials would say precisely how much his campaign had raised or how far short of their goals it had fallen.

W e have a good guy in the White House, a smart man of judicious temperament and profound ideals, a man with a sweet private life, a man of dignity and good humor, whose enemies, waving their hairy arms and legs, woofing, yelling absurdities, only make him look taller. Washington, being a company town, feasts on gossip, but I think the Democratic Party, skittish as it is, full of happy blather, somehow has brought forth a champion. This should please anyone who loves this country, and as for the others, let them chew on carpets and get what nourishment they can. End of sermonette.

Perhaps the most surprising thing about the report by Bryan P. Sears of the Towson Times that two development attorneys - including County Executive James T. Smith Jr.'s son - are making a major fundraising push to back favored Baltimore County Council candidates in potentially open races is that they're limiting their ambition to three districts. After all, the 2nd District seat might be open, too. Why not try to buy a clear majority? The effort by Michael Paul Smith and David Gildea to raise money for candidates in the 1st, 5th and 6th councilmanic districts might be unusual in its scope and in the dollar amounts they're bringing in. But in terms of development interests seeking influence over Baltimore County government, somebody else thought of that back around the dawn of time.