A lot of speculation and jockeying for position will be taking place over the next year regarding who will be the eventual contestants in New Mexico’s 2012 general election. In the meantime, Albuquerque will elect four city councilors this year in the city’s even-numbered council districts. It will be the third time the city’s innovative public financing system for elections is utilized, but may also be the last for a key component of that system.
Albuquerque passed its public financing system in 2005, and it was first used in 2007. Basically, the city distributes a lump sum to qualifying candidates who opt into the system agreeing to not spend any other funds. Then, the system provides for ‘matching funds’ to be distributed to candidates if their privately financed opponents or other entities spend an amount more than that lump sum plus a proscribed in-kind donation allowance, in opposition to their campaign.
After the 2009 mayoral race, in which all three candidates utilized the system, the public financing system was lauded as a success that leveled the playing field. All three candidates spent roughly the same amount of money, with considerably less funds entering the race from private sources and no matching funds issued. Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry won that race, beating out former Mayor Martin Chavez, who many saw as the front runner.
But since then, similar matching fund provisions used in other states have been challenged in court. The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in late March regarding the constitutionality of an Arizona matching fund system, and their final decision could render Albuquerque’s current matching funds provision obsolete. Many believe that a Supreme Court decision against such systems is likely, given their landmark ‘Citizens United’ decision, which equated corporate electioneering communications with free speech. One outcome of that decision, many fear, is that it will lead to a flood of unregulated private money into the election process.
If the matching funds component of Albuquerque’s public financing system is struck down, however, there are other options the city council could choose in order to keep the system intact.
“A lot of thought has already gone into possible replacements for the matching fund provision,” Steve Allen, Executive Director of good government group Common Cause, told KUNM. “The most popular idea, and the one Common Cause would recommend, would be to create a system similar to the Fair Elections Now Act, a federal proposal to create a public campaign financing system for congressional races.”
Such a system works the same way as the Albuquerque system in that candidates would receive an initial public grant if they qualified, Allen said. But instead of the existing matching fund mechanism, publicly funded candidates would be allowed to continue raising small donations of $100 or less and have those donations matched with additional public money. In the federal proposal, it would be a 4-1 match. For instance, if the publicly funded candidate received a $100 contribution, she would get $400 in matched money.
“This system would allow publicly financed candidates to remain competitive against a privately financed candidate, while not running contrary to the bizarre constitutional objections we anticipate from the five Supreme Court justices who gave us last year’s disastrous Citizens United v. FEC decision,” Allen concluded, in a clear knock against that decision.
Other ideas are given in a report about Albuquerque’s public financing system, prepared by the Center for Governmental Studies, which also contains a description of the constitutional issues in play regarding the matching funds provision.
Regardless of the Supreme Court decision, this year’s Albuquerque municipal race won’t be affected. The public financing qualifying process has already begun, with candidates currently in an exploratory phase. Then, during the month of May potential publicly financed candidates must raise individual contributions of $5 from one percent of the people residing in their district. Once they meet that benchmark, they will qualify for inclusion in the program.