Dec 6, 2007 -- Reform Groups Urge for Changes to the Presidential Public Financing System

December 6, 2007

Dear Senator,

Our organizations strongly urge you to co-sponsor the bipartisan, bicameral legislation introduced yesterday to repair the presidential public financing system.

The principal Senate sponsors of the legislation are Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) and Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), joined by Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-IL), the four Democratic Senators who are running for president in 2008, Senators Barack Obama (D-IL), Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Joe Biden (D-DE) and Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, Senator John Kerry (D-MA).

The principal House sponsors of the legislation are Representatives David Price (D-NC) and Christopher Shays (R-CT), joined by Representatives Mike Castle (R-DE), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) and Todd Platts (R-PA).

Our organizations include Americans for Campaign Reform, Campaign Legal Center, Committee for Economic Development, Common Cause, Democracy 21, the League of Women Voters, Public Campaign, Public Citizen and U.S. PIRG.

The presidential public financing system was established in the wake of the Watergate scandals to take the presidency off the auction block, to provide presidential candidates with the resources necessary to run financially competitive races, and to curb unlimited spending in presidential campaigns.

The presidential public financing system served the nation well for most of its existence. Almost all of the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates between 1976 and 2000 used the system to finance their presidential races in the primary and general elections. Importantly, the public financing system allowed for competitive races, with challengers winning three of the six races that involved incumbent presidents.

The presidential public financing system is now broken, however, and needs to be fixed. With Congress failing to make any significant adjustments in the presidential public financing system since it was enacted in 1974, the spending limits for the presidential primaries are far too low today to accommodate the costs of running a modern presidential primary campaign. Similarly, there are insufficient public funds available to presidential candidates to make the system the kind of attractive alternative for candidates to finance their races that it was for most of its existence.

As a result, we are facing a presidential election in 2008 where the two major party nominees alone are expected to spend a combined $1 billion in private campaign contributions for their primary and general election races.

The problems in the special interest financing of the 2008 presidential election, including the growing role being played by influence-seeking bundlers, only have served to reinforce the dangers of a privately-funded presidential campaign, driven by unlimited spending and increasingly dependent on bundlers to raise huge amounts of money.

It is essential to the health of our democracy and to the integrity of the presidency that we repair the presidential public financing system for future presidential races. It is imperative to avoid having the presidency on a permanent auction block and our presidential candidates engaged in a never-ending race to spend ever-growing massive amounts of money. As The New York Times stated in an editorial endorsing legislation to fix the presidential public financing system ( September 12, 2007):

For 30 years after the Watergate scandal, the nation did well by the public financing campaign system, which served as a cleaner alternative to private political money. Congress let that die on the vine, failing to raise subsidy levels to meet campaign inflation. The result is candidates' gratefully wooing bundlers and selling privileged access -- with far too few questions asked.

The legislation introduced yesterday would restore the viability of the presidential public financing system and again make the system advantageous for candidates to use.

The legislation would increase the overall spending limits and the amount of public funds available for candidates who opt into the presidential system. It would end the ineffective system of state-by-state spending limits. And the legislation would provide additional public funds and higher spending limits to allow candidates who use the system to compete financially with candidates who reject the system and choose instead to make expenditures that significantly exceed the spending limits.

Furthermore, the legislation would require presidential candidates to disclose the individuals who bundle contributions for them and the total amounts they bundle. The role and significance of bundlers, however, would be greatly reduced in a repaired public financing system where special interest money is no longer so important.

We strongly urge you to co-sponsor this legislation and to work for its enactment.