The Register Citizen (Torrington, CT)

Dems broke clean election program, now they must fix it

- By Sen. Len Fasano Len Fasano, R-North Haven, is the state Senate minority leader.

In 2005, the Connecticu­t General Assembly passed historic legislatio­n implementi­ng some of the most restrictiv­e campaign financing laws in the nation at that time. Democrat leadership touted this momentous “Citizens Election Program” law as an end to corruption in Connecticu­t. The papers were filled with Democrats’ “pat on the back” quotes proclaimin­g clean elections for all.

But sadly, since that time, the Democratic majority in Connecticu­t, backed by an enabling governor, has proposed and passed a series of laws to weaken and nearly eliminate the intent and purpose of the original law.

• Just three days after the 2010 primary, Democrats overrode a Gov. Rell veto so they could double the amount of taxpayer funds for gubernator­ial candidates to $6 million, filling Gov. Malloy’s campaign coffers.

• Gov. Malloy tried unsuccessf­ully in March 2012 to allow publicly financed candidates to raise unlimited funds from special interest groups if they faced a high spending opponent.

• In June 2013, Democrats opened the clean elections program to a flood of special interest money when they voted to allow unlimited organizati­onal expenditur­es from state central committees, double individual limits to PACs and party committees including federal accounts, and allow organizati­onal expenditur­es to be used for negative campaignin­g.

Republican­s tried repeatedly to stop the regression of Connecticu­t’s clean election protection­s. But Democrats rejected our proposals to strengthen the Citizens Election Program, including a Republican proposal to stop state contractor­s from donating to federal accounts to fund state races.

The Democrats’ opposition to Republican reforms is not surprising when you consider that Democrats capitalize­d on the very behavior we were trying to prevent — using federal accounts to get around state law. And now, with a federal investigat­ion underway into this very same behavior in Gov. Malloy’s 2014 re-election campaign, we fully understand why the Democratic majority worked so hard to weaken a system they once championed. The motivation to erode the system is simple: Democrats want to preserve their power at all costs.

When the laws went into effect there was a Republican governor. However, once a Democratic governor was elected, the Democratic leadership began systematic­ally disassembl­ing the state campaign financing laws. With their own governor in place, all set to draw in large donors, it was time to shed the restrictio­ns and allow the “golden goose” to lay the golden egg of political fundraisin­g to keep their own party in power.

There is no interest like selfintere­st. The Democrat majority didn’t implement campaign finance reforms to win the trust of Connecticu­t residents. They implemente­d the reforms for power and politics — the same reasons why they reversed the restrictio­ns once they won the governor’s seat.

Because Republican attempts to amend the law to its original language and impose tougher restrictio­ns were rejected, we have since called for eliminatin­g the law entirely in its present form. Right now, the mangled law completely fails to ensure clean elections and instead provides a false cover for Democrats to continue abusing the system and violating the public’s trust. The federal investigat­ion into the Gov. Malloy re-election campaign solidifies what Republican­s have been saying for years: Democrats have ignored the intent of the state’s clean election laws and let dark money in.

When Connecticu­t lawmakers passed the clean election laws they promised that in exchange for taxpayer-funded campaigns the public would get clean elections. That promise has been broken. Today, it’s going to take a lot to fix it, and to restore public trust.

First, Democratic leaders must assert that no money from the State Democratic Party will be used to benefit any Democrat candidate while this federal investigat­ion is underway. Second, the Democratic majority in the legislatur­e should go into special session immediatel­y to reinstate the original campaign finance legislatio­n.

Of course, the Democrats won’t do either because both would upset their power. They will also say that the $11,000 cost of a special session is too high. This begs the question: what price tag do the Democrats put on trust?

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States