data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b48a3/b48a3c2b9097392457a7d42c4275e2924ea0454a" alt=""
2 minute read
Democrats in the Legislature pump the brakes on passing public financing for political campaigns
Astrange thing is happening in Albany these days, mostly out of view.
Assembly Democrats, with the tacit approval of Senate Democrats, are trying to pump the brakes on a long-planned implementation of public financing for legislative and statewide campaigns. These are the very Democrats who, with progressives and socialists among them, are supposed to apply pressure on a more conservative governor, and they are on the verge of scuttling the most significant overhaul of New York’s antiquated campaign finance system in history.
Advertisement
posal goes through, more money could be theoretically added to the program next year.
But state lawmakers, led by Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, have expressed new skepticism of public financing of elections. They claim that since Assembly districts are due to be redrawn again by a quasi-independent commission, thanks to last year’s redistricting fiasco, going forward with the plan in the short term may not make sense. All members of the Assembly facing re-election in 2024 will encounter districts that have changed at least slightly.
ROSS BARKAN
As a result, it’s Gov. Kathy Hochul, the recipient of so much cash from wellheeled donors last year, who is the best hope for good-government and civil rights organizations that want to see public financing happen in time for next year’s legislative contests. In her executive budget, Hochul has earmarked $25 million to fund the program with an additional $4 million for 54 new staff members. The governor will negotiate the budget with the Legislature this month. If Hochul’s pro-
Redistricting, however, shouldn’t affect how elections get funded. Why can’t an incumbent and a challenger receive matching funds if they’re running in brand-new districts? What difference does it make, really?
If public financing is implemented, Assembly candidates would be eligible to receive up to $350,000 in matching contributions in both the primary and the general election. The system, for those who opt in, would also apply to candidates for state Senate and statewide office, including governor.
City has its own system
The city has its own successful system for financing municipal campaigns. The New York Campaign Finance Board oversees the program and aggressively audits every campaign, checking for malfeasance. Because small donations can be matched 8 to 1 with public money, the system allows people who aren’t wealthy or well connected to credibly run for office. City
Council primaries, in particular, are always crowded and fairly competitive. Public matching takes the strain off fundraising and allows candidates to spend most of their time talking to voters. Candidates for state office face a very different reality. Donor limits for Assembly and Senate campaigns are higher than those permitted for congressional campaigns, which is absurd. Millionaire donors and political action committees can swing these legislative races because they are allowed to write such large checks. It’s legal for a single donor to give $70,000 to a gubernatorial candidate. This system is a national embarrassment. Public finance isn’t perfect. There are valid criticisms that matching funds allow for unserious candidates to emerge and consultants to feast on them. But the alternative is clearly worse.
Assembly Democrats don’t have a valid excuse for delaying the implementation of a matching funds program, and Senate Democrats should stop giving them cover. It will be up to Hochul to force it through in the budget, due at the end of the month, and she should.
Quick takes
● An Upper West Side community board voted against allowing an e-bike charging station near the subway. The board was wrong to do this, but it should be up to private app companies to help pay for the infrastructure they require for their workers.
● Will Mayor Eric Adams benefit from a gradual decline in crime? It’s plausible—if perception begins to align with reality. For Adams, that will be a steep challenge. ■
Ross Barkan is a journalist and author in New York City.