Share Email 0 Shares

The Vermont Senate passed a campaign finance bill on Thursday that Democrats and Republicans alike openly questioned. After an hourlong debate, in which the legislation was characterized as a necessary stopgap, senators held their noses and passed the legislation 20-8.

The legislation, S.82, now awaits the governor’s signature.

Get Final Reading delivered to your inbox. Sign up free.

The state’s previous campaign finance law was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006. Vermont has, in effect, had no legal rules in place since that time. In the meantime, the courts have struck down laws that would limit independent expenditures made on behalf of candidates for mass media buys.

The bill, which was originally conceived of as a vehicle for reform of the current system, was seen by many as a step backward. Nevertheless, a majority of Democrats, who dominate the Senate and stand to gain the most from the bill, supported it.

“I am prepared to vote for this campaign finance bill even though it’s flawed and I’m not entirely happy with it because it’s the best we can do,” Sen. Dick McCormack said.

S.82 doubles the amount an individual, business or other entity can give to a statewide candidate to $4,000. Lawmakers, meanwhile, would see a reduction in the amount they can raise in each election cycle from $2,000 to $1,000 for House candidates and $1,500 for Senate hopefuls.

The legislation significantly increases the cap on donations from companies or individuals to political parties to $10,000. Donors also can give separately to state and national parties, effectively doubling the amount of contributions that the parties can give to candidates’ campaigns.

Parties can then give unlimited amounts to individual candidates.

VTDigger is underwritten by:

Independent candidates, who have no party affiliation, would not have this option.

Democrats in the House and the Senate have said that increasing donations to parties will enable candidates to compete with Super PAC money for independent expenditures on mass media.

Sen. Peter Galbraith, D-Windham, passionately pled with his colleagues to reject the proposal because S.82 would allow parties to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars from a single wealthy individual or corporation, which could be then funneled into individual candidates’ coffers.

Galbraith said wealthy people could legally use the parties as a pass-through to give large, unlimited donations to candidates.

In the example he presented on the Senate floor, Galbraith explained that under the proposal an individual could give $10,000 to the state party, $10,000 to the national party and then direct $10,000 from as many corporations as he or she wanted to the state and/or national party, all of which could be given with the condition that the monies be for a single candidate.

“Under this bill a donor could contribute hundreds of thousands of dollars right into the campaign coffers of an individual (candidate),” Galbraith said.

Under current law, the lower limits constrains gifts to parties to tens of thousands of dollars.

Sen. Kevin Mullin, R-Rutland, objected to the process by which the conference committee arrived at its final report. The bill was struck and replaced by new language in the process and the party amount limits were three times higher than the cap set in the Senate’s original proposal.

“I am concerned that individual candidates are really getting squeezed,” Mullin said.

Secretary of State Jim Condos urged senators to pass S.82 because he says it will enable his office to require online campaign filings, disclosure of Super PAC media buys and increases the number of reporting filings from seven to nine. It also increases public financing for any candidate.

“I am not happy to see the increase in contribution limits from single sources to statewide candidates, nor am I happy that the Legislature cannot currently limit contributions to Super PACs,” Condos said in a letter to lawmakers. “I understand the difficult predicament this has put many of you in as I too would like to reduce the amount of money in Vermont politics. However, S.82 is not just about campaign limits. It is about providing with Vermonters with a campaign finance law, far greater transparency when it comes to money in politics, (and) a public financing option.”

Paul Burns, executive director of VPIRG, says the bill is a “real retreat from campaign finance reform, and it gives more power and influence to corporations, PACs and very wealthy individuals who had plenty of power to begin with.”

Burns says his group will urge the governor to veto the legislation. Hours after the passage of S.82, Jerry Greenfield (of Ben & Jerry’s Homemade) told VPIRG’s members to contact the governor and urge him to reject the bill.

“The one thing we can’t afford to do is give corporations, PACs and very wealthy folks any more influence over how you and I elect our leaders in Montpelier,” Greenfield wrote. “It’s not only unnecessary, it’s just wrong.”

Editor’s note: This story was updated at 6 a.m. Jan. 17.

VTDigger is underwritten by:

Share Email 0 Shares