The New York Times calls the U.S. Supreme Court decision “reckless.” Their editorial on it was headlined “Keeping Politics Safe for the Rich.” The issue, as you may have guessed, is the court’s latest bombshell directed at democratic elections – you remember those, the ones where voices other than big corporations and the economic elite can still be heard.

The story goes that the people of Arizona had the gall to set up a system of campaign financing whereby qualifying candidates get a lump-sum grant if they forego raising large private contributions. If the opposition chooses not to participate and spends more than the grant amount, the participating candidate qualifies for additional matching funds. It’s called “clean elections,” a version of which exists in Connecticut and Maine and for judicial races, in a number of places, including Wisconsin and North Carolina. Not incidentally, more than one-third of the members of the U.S. House have already signed on to a somewhat comparable piece of legislation for the Congress, the Fair Elections Now Act.

The Roberts court, however, in its effort to turn back the clock on any kind of sensible limits on the buying and selling of elections - not to mention the chance of reinvigorating the process through a system that encourages candidacies untethered to big monied interests - would have none of it.  Tuesday's unsigned order upends the Arizona law by reinstating a trial court injunction immediately cutting off matching funds to candidates in the middle of their election races. A Brennan Center attorney called the move "shockingly irresponsible." The court was apparently persuaded by the argument of right-wing interests, including the Goldwater Institute, that the matching funds "chilled" the freedom of speech of well-financed candidates.

What seems really chilling is the court's relentless march to annihilate campaign finance regulation. But this is not a war easily one, even by the Supreme Court, against those still inspired by the rights of citizens in a democracy. There are too many fronts.

And one of them is here in Pennsylvania, where campaign finance regulation is more a frontier than reality.  Reformers are moving a modest but worthy piece of legislation that would set some limits on campaign contributions by individuals, PACs and party committees. No longer could a few hedge fund managers concoct a statewide campaign - or any campaign - out of thin air. HB 2162 has been inching its way through the House, but with summer approaching and the budget fight about to explode we need another push. Appropriations Committee Chairman Dwight Evans  (215-549-0220) needs serious encouragement to schedule a committee vote to get the bill to the floor. The votes are lined up.

Contact Dwight Evans, either by phone or email (215-549-0220), and ask him to move the campaign finance bill, HB 2162, out of committee. It's a vital skirmish for our state in what seems like a war against fair elections led by some folks in black robes in Washington. This one is winnable so let's do it!  Click here to let us know the result of your call.

Steve Strahs
ELECTION REFORM NETWORK
www.electionreformnetwork.us