Big national money backs initiative to limit big campaign donations



less Ex-Attorney General Rob McKenna opposes Initiative 1464, which would use state money to finance campaigns for the Legislature. He argues that the state is already short of money and under court order to fully fund K-12 education. Ex-Attorney General Rob McKenna opposes Initiative 1464, which would use state money to finance campaigns for the Legislature. He argues that the state is already short of money and under court order to fully ... more Photo: JOSHUA TRUJILLO Photo: JOSHUA TRUJILLO Image 1 of / 1 Caption Close Big national money backs initiative to limit big campaign donations 1 / 1 Back to Gallery

"Big money interests" are the bogeymen cited by Initiative 1464, which would create direct state financing of candidates for the Legislature -- but big money from out-of-state interests and wealthy individuals is fueling the reform measure.

The initiative would establish a system of "democracy credits" to pay for campaigns.

Each registered voter -- Washington has nearly 4.2 million of them -- would get three $50 credits from the state. The voter would direct the money to candidates of his or her choice for the state Legislature.

The money to pay for this plan would come from repealing the non-resident sales tax exemption, treasured by businesses along the Oregon border as a way of luring business north of the Columbia River.

Washington is being used as a national guinea pig, as was Seattle last year, by advocates of public campaign financing, based mainly on the East Coast. They have put up a war chest of nearly $2.6 million.

Jonathan Soros, CEO of JS Capital Management in New York, has given $475,000. Sean Eldridge, an unsuccessful candidate for Congress in New York, is in for $375,000. William Von Muffling, a third New Yorker and CEO of Cantillon Capital, has given $100,000.

The Washington, D.C., based Every Voice group has given $375,000. Massachusetts-based Represent US has given $300,000.

The leading local donor, at $500,000, is Connie Ballmer, wife of the former Microsoft CEO and owner of the Los Angeles Kings. The campaign has received 18 contributions of $50,000 or more, only three of them (two from Ballmer) from within Washington state.

"This is not grass roots," ex-Attorney General Rob McKenna, an initiative foe, argued on Monday.

The case for I-1464?

"We have a lot of good candidates running: The values that speak loudest are those who want to get things from them," Peter McCollum, the initiative's campaign director, told a I-1464 debate on Monday at Folio, the members lending library in downtown Seattle.

Washington will see more than $100 million spent on state campaigns, with an additional $35 million in "independent" expenditures, McCollum added. The cost of legislative campaigns has soared into the six figures.

McKenna, for the No side, argued priorities.

"This initiative, over 10 years, would pour more than $280 million into the campaigns of candidates," McKenna said. The state is short of money already, and under orders from the Washington State Supreme Court to fully fund K-thru-12 education by September 2017.

McKenna urged a reading of the fine print.

I-1464 bars lobbyists and public contractors from making big contributions to legislators and legislative contractors they were trying to influence.

Unions are, however, exempt from the definition of public contractors. The Service Employees International Union is spending an estimated $1 million on 2016 legislative races, largely to elect lawmakers who will ratify of a $15-an-hour labor contract it has negotiated for health care workers.

"This initiative says that some contractors are more important than others," McKenna noted.

In response, said McCollum, I-1464 will give voters a lot more information on who influences candidates and "dilute the power of big donors." It will, he said, raise a level of participation that currently sees just 1.5 percent of voters contribute to campaigns.

"Doesn't this favor the incumbents?" asked former Seattle City Council member Jan Drago.

In other to qualify for "democracy vouchers," a candidate for Legislature must first line up donations from 75 different residents of his/her district, and agree to contribution limits.

Drago argued that a first-time candidate will be at a disadvantage. The incumbent, with an organization, can line up the donations -- and then lean on various groups to direct the voucher donations of their members.

"By the time they (first timers) go out there, most of the vouchers will be gone," Drago argued.

Not such a problem, replied McCollum. "If you're going to be running for the legislature, you're naturally going to be raising small donations, anyway," he said.

McKenna argued a 1st Amendment, free speech issue. Will not a taxpayer's dollars be channeled through "democracy vouchers" to a candidate or legislator that he or she opposes. He raised the possibility of a "forced donation."

Seattle voted for the voucher system last year, the campaign underwritten by the same groups that are supporting I-1464 statewide.

I-1464 is not running so well in the polls. It copped only 34 percent in the Elway Poll last August, doing best in Seattle It led by a narrow 42-37 percent margin in last week's KOMO-Strategies 360 poll, with a high 21 percent undecided.

The established wisdom on initiatives is that they need at least 50 percent support in polls to stand a chance of passing.

Washington may again be a national model -- Initiatives on gun safety and raising the minimum wage are running far ahead -- but not on public financing of campaigns.