By changing how elections are financed in Las Cruces, some hope to counter big money they fear arrived in the city with the recent failed recall attempt. They also hope to open up elections to more people.
Pictures of Money / Creative Commons
Some want to head off big-money elections they fear arrived in Las Cruces with the failed recall attempt earlier this year. (photo cc info)
There historically hasn’t been as much spending on local elections here as in some other places. But a political action committee spent $54,000 earlier this year at least in part on a failed effort to recall three city councilors.
Some, like Councilor Olga Pedroza, who was a target of that recall attempt, are pushing public financing to head off big-money elections they fear have now arrived in Las Cruces.
“Prior to the recall effort, I would have agreed that local city elections are free from big money. … I have changed my mind,” Pedroza told NMPolitics.net. “Now I think even cities of our size have become or are becoming targets of the people with a lot of money.”
More candidates
There’s another important reason to implement public financing, proponents say: It increases participation in elections by allowing more people to run for office — and by encouraging people to donate to campaigns and vote.
Though candidates haven’t had to raise and spend as much on city elections here as they have state and national races, money still determines a candidate’s viability. Public financing “allows very smart people who don’t have this kind of money to run,” Mayor Ken Miyagishima said at a recent work session on the topic.
Under the public-financing proposal from Common Cause New Mexico, the city would place $2 per resident into a public-financing fund each year. Those who choose to sign up and qualify for public financing would face limits on contribution sizes — $200 for mayoral candidates and $100 for council candidates. In exchange they would receive $4 in public funds for every $1 they raise through donations.
A mayoral candidate would need to collect 100 donations of between $5 and $100 from registered voters in the city — and at least $5,000 total — to qualify. Council candidates would need to collect 25 donations from registered voters in their district — and at least $1,000 total — to qualify.
Expenditures would also be capped.
Encouraging donating and voting
Voter turnout is low and has been dropping recently in Las Cruces municipal elections, noted Craig Fenske of Common Cause New Mexico. Allowing those who participate in a voluntary public-financing system to accept only small contributions pushes them “to engage voters within their districts and would likely increase voter interest and turnout,” Fenske said.
“We can engage a broader spectrum of the electorate in our city elections,” he said.
Pedroza agreed.
“The way a candidate qualifies for matching funds from the government is structured to force the candidate to interact with the voters,” she said. “He or she can only qualify for the funds by getting a certain number of small donations from the constituents. So, the candidate has to go to the people and talk to them.”
The proposed cap on donation amounts and matching public funds would also theoretically make people more willing to donate, as they would know their money would make a direct impact, Fenske said.
Pedroza and some other city officials are sold on public financing. Miyagishima said at the work session that he’s “always been a supporter of public financing.” And Councilor Gill Sorg said at the meeting, “I favor the public financing of elections, period.”
‘Not convinced’
Not all are enthusiastic about public financing. Council Ceil Levatino said she is “not convinced it’s needed” in Las Cruces.
“Public financing will not affect voter turnout. People don’t turn out to vote because they feel they don’t have a voice, not because they think their officials are corrupt,” she told NMPolitics.net. “There is no evidence that big money is involved in elections here. How do you even define big money?”
Nancy Baker, a retired NMSU government professor who is working with Common Cause on the proposal, said big money is an important factor even if there’s less spending on local elections. She said most Americans believe “money buys elections and office holders make policy to please their big donors.”
“Local perceptions cannot be separated from national perceptions,” Baker said. “…The perception that a local election is funded in part by large and covert outside donations is in itself troubling for maintaining citizen confidence in a fair process.”
The city council hasn’t yet decided whether to move ahead with public financing. If the council approves a public-financing system, it would likely be implemented for the November 2017 election, not the municipal election that will be held later this year, City Manager Robert Garza said at the work session.