On June 6, U.S. District Court Judge Stefan Underhill, a Clinton appointee, held a hearing in Green Party of Connecticut v Garfield, 3:06cv-1030. The judge seemed to give no indication of his thoughts, but he did indicate he would probably rule in a week or two. The issue is the discriminatory aspects of Connecticut’s public funding law for candidates for state office. All candidates who seek public funding are required to collect a certain number of $5 contributions (the number of contributions depends on which office is being sought). However, independents and candidates of new parties need a petition signed by 20% of the voters as well as meeting the contribution requirement.

Connecticut, assisted by the Brennan Center, argued that the case should not even receive a trial. The Brennan Center issued a press release on June 6, titled, “Brennan Center Urges Federal Court to Dismiss Challenge to Connecticut Campaign Finance Law.” The press release says “In 1976 the Supreme Court in Buckley v Valeo upheld a federal public financing system for presidential elections that is very similar to Connecticut’s law in its treatment of minor party candidates.” This sentence is not true.

The federal law treated all presidential candidates seeking the nomination of a party exactly alike. They all had to raise $5,000 in each of 20 states. Their party affiliation was irrelevant.

The federal law limited general election public funding to parties that had polled 5% of the vote in the last election (or, if they got 5% in the current election, they got funding immediately after the election was over). It is true that part of the federal program meant that certain parties received this type of funding and certain other parties didn’t. But the standard was objectively non-discriminatory. It was the same standard for every party. By analogy, if Connecticut required the same number of $5 contributions for every candidate, that would match the federal system. Some candidates would get the public funding and others wouldn’t, but the standard is the same for all.

By contrast, Connecticut has a lower standard for Democrats and Republicans, and a higher standard for independents and new parties.

The Brennan Center press release also mislead its readers, by saying that Tom Sevigny, described as a founder of the Connecticut Green Party, supports the law. The press release does not mention that Sevigny is no longer a member of the Green Party. He is a registered independent.

The Brennan Center was very helpful to minor parties from its founding in the 1990’s, through 2003. It has new leadership and has become an enemy of minor party members and independent voters.