news story / By John C. Osborn

Mad Props

On the ballot: campaign finance reform, public power and auto insurance rates

(May 27, 2010)  Last week, we gave you the low-down on Propositions 13 and 14, which you can check out in the archives. Today, we give you the three other propositions California voters will decide on in June that could create a publicly funded elections scheme, make it more difficult for local governments to form publicly funded utilities and loosen up regulations on the auto insurance industry. Without further ado, we give you Mad Props.

Speaking About Campaign Finance Reform

Every election cycle, usually with the first filing of campaign finance disclosure forms, a flurry of fingers start pointing in one direction or another crying “foul” and “special interest”; by the end, the theme becomes “reform.” The same conversation is happening at the state level, and voters will decide whether to bite.

Proposition 15, if passed, would test out a complicated and expensive publicly funded campaign scheme for the office of the California Secretary of State in the 2014 and 2018 election cycles. This proposition is packed with details, too many to address in print. But here is a summary.

Currently, lobbyists have to pay $25 a year to have the pleasure of interacting directly with elected officials. Under this prop, that fee would skyrocket to a whopping $700 every two years. The state would then give all the moolah made from the oodles of lobbyists in California to candidates qualifying to run for Secretary of State. (It is also against the California Constitution to use public funds to finance an election; this prop would amend that.)

If the candidate is representing a major or minor party, or is an independent, she will receive a grant set at a particular tier, which is all the money a candidate can raise unless opponents who have not opted into the program start raising more. For example, a major party candidate (ie. Democrat or Republican) in the program would receive $1 million for the primary and up to $5 million if an opponent starts raising more. For the general election, the amount increases to $1.3 million and $5.2 million, respectively.

If there are too many candidates in the program and not enough money to go around, then the grant money would be split accordingly and they can raise the rest privately. Supporters see this as a way to address the oodles of cash in elections, while opponents believe the law unfairly penalizes lobbyists and taxpayers.

That’s the quickie. Read your voter guide for more details.

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE >SHARE