Editorial: Voters care about big money’s influence

09/27/2006

Candidates’ silence doesn’t make issue go away.

Star Tribune
Published: September 26, 2006

Armchair campaign managers, take a guess: What issue ranks with public education, jobs and state taxes among Minnesotans, but is seldom mentioned by politicians of either party? It’s concern about the excessive and sometimes corrupting influence of money on government and politics.

That’s the finding of Minnesota’s share of a five-state survey conducted this summer by the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation (http://www.joycefdn.org), which makes grants aimed at a better natural, economic, social and cultural environment in the Great Lakes region. About one in four Minnesotans surveyed said campaign money’s influence over state government is an extreme concern. (The survey’s margin of error in Minnesota was 4.9 percentage points.)

When an issue is that hot, it’s rare for politicians to be silent about it—unless it’s something that makes both of the two big parties nervous. That’s the case when reformers start clamoring for more restrictions on the flow of cash into campaigns. Both Republicans and DFLers are addicted to special interest money to finance their enterprises. Only the Independence Party makes campaign finance reform a theme.

That may explain why legislation which would give state candidates the option of full public financing if they reject most private contributions has languished for years at the Minnesota Legislature. An emerging trend toward partisan judicial elections has not been met with nearly enough official concern about judges accepting campaign contributions.

But an insistent public can persuade legislators to say no to those who seek to buy their loyalty. It happened after Watergate in the 1970s and, in Minnesota, in the 1990s, when gifts from lobbyists to legislators were banned.

Now, the Joyce survey says, 7 out of 10 Minnesotans say that unless the influence of money in state government is reduced, they doubt that elected officials will “keep their promises on issues that are important to people like me.” If that level of concern does not constitute a demand for action, it’s getting very close.