Maryland State Senator Paul Pinsky and 16 other Maryland State Senators have introduced SB 681, to provide for public funding for candidates for the state legislature. The bill does not discriminate for or against any candidates on the basis of the candidate’s partisan affiliation or lack of affiliation. Candidates would need to obtain $5 donations from at least 350 individuals.
Brian Bittner points out that the bill may in practice be discriminatory, because it funds candidates in the primary season if they are running in a primary, or if they are petitioning as an independent candidate, but not if they are seeking the convention nomination of a ballot-qualified minor party. The bill’s authors probably wrote the bill that way, on the theory that it doesn’t cost much money to win nomination at a convention of a small ballot-qualified party. But one danger is that if the fund runs out of money in the primary season, there might not be funding for the general election season. The bill has a hearing on March 11.
Direct discrimination on the basis of partisan affiliation (or lack of same) is not necessarily the whole story, though. So let’s all look through the bill’s text:
http://mlis.state.md.us/2010rs/bills/sb/sb0681f.pdf
On page 10, Section 15-102, Subsection (C) says the state board managing the system shall
(1) ENSURE THAT THE SYSTEM OF PUBLIC FINANCING OF ELECTIONS:
(I) ACCOMMODATES QUALIFYING CANDIDATES ON A FIRST–COME, FIRST–SERVED BASIS;
(II) ESTABLISHES AN INITIAL LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF PARTICIPATING CANDIDATES DURING AN ELECTION CYCLE; AND
(III) ALLOWS FOR AN INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF PARTICIPATING CANDIDATES DURING THE ELECTION CYCLE IN CORRELATION TO THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THE FUND;
Understandable that they’d want to avoid having the fund run out of money — but might there be a bias toward candidates from the established parties as the likely first-comers who are first served? Some, perhaps.
I’m not up on Maryland election law or scheduling, so I don’t know if non-R&D parties or their candidates can get into a primary, or what that would take, or whether there are any timing issues that are significantly different depending on a candidate’s affiliation (or lack). If someone who does know about these things can address them, it would be appreciated.
I am a bit concerned about the language in Section 15-107 on page 17 saying that candidates can only apply to the board to qualify for the fund once for any election — and the board’s decision is not subject to judicial review. But that’s almost as much a concern over the whole process as it is over any additional pressure faced by non-R&D candidates with less institutional support for their efforts to qualify properly.
Hmm . . . here’s another tidbit. Subsection (C) of Section 15-117 on page 24 gives the state board discretion to say “AN INDIVIDUAL WHO 24 VIOLATES THIS TITLE MAY BE BARRED FROM FURTHER PARTICIPATION AS A PARTICIPATING CANDIDATE UNDER THIS TITLE.” With all the things the State Board of Elections would get to do under this bill, I think I might want to know how the members of that body get their seats.
That information isn’t here, of course, because that’s an existing body. But there is information on page 25 about “a Commission to Study Public Financing of Elections in Maryland.” Its ten members would include:
[==================================]
* One member of the Senate of Maryland, appointed by the President of the Senate;
* One member of the House of Delegates, appointed by the Speaker of the House;
* Six individuals appointed by the Governor, including:
(i) A member of the State Board of Elections;
(ii) A member of the State Ethics Commission; and
(iii) Four representatives of statewide organizations concerned with campaign finance practices, fair elections, and ethics in government;
* One representative appointed by the chair of the Maryland State Democratic Party Central Committee; and
* One representative appointed by the chair of the Maryland State Republican Party Central Committee.
[==================================]
The governor would pick the chair, and the staff would come from the State Board of Elections and the State Ethics Commission — whose membership qualifications now also draw my curiosity. But it would seem to be up to the governor whether this could be prevented from becoming a partisan (or bi-partisan) exercise. OTOH, the commission wouldn’t meet until after the 2014 fall elections — so there’s a bit of time to look ahead.
That’s my fifteen minutes for now. Who’s the next reader?