News Elsewhere

Anti-Clean Elections group secures Nov. ballot

PHOENIX - Two groups are going to spend millions of dollars to debate the influence of money on politics. A group seeking virtual repeal of Arizona's 6-year-old system of public financing of campaigns filed 275,100 signatures Thursday - well over the 183,917 needed - to put the issue on the November ballot. That effort is fueled largely by contributions from developers, insurance companies and other businesses, most, but not all, based in Arizona. On the other side is a committee that seeks to preserve the Citizens Clean Elections Act enacted in 1998. Its funds come from both in-state and out-of-state organizations who, while they are listed on disclosure forms at the Secretary of State's Office, do not reveal how much they received from individuals and other organizations. Some of those groups see Arizona as a bellwether for what will happen elsewhere. "There would be a ripple effect beyond Arizona," said Nick Nyhart, director of Washington, D.C.-based Public Campaign, which, with its foundation, has given $60,000 to keep Arizona's public financing system for candidates. Nathan Sproul, who is directing the initiative effort, chided the supporters of public financing for lack of transparency in their source of funds. But Barbara Lubin, director of the Arizona Clean Elections Institute, said there is a key difference between those who are financing each side. She said those who give to the campaign to save public financing don't have the same direct interest in influencing legislation. That distinction is not entirely accurate. For example, the board of the Arizona Advocacy Network, which has given $91,000 to preserve public financing, includes members of groups including Planned Parenthood, the Sierra Club and Don't Waste Arizona. Another $50,000 came from Public Campaign, which, in turn, gets most of its $1.36 million annual budget from foundations. One of those foundations is the Open Society Institute run by George Soros - the same man who gave $430,000 to a 1996 Arizona initiative to reduce penalties for drug offenses and who wants to repeal state drug laws. Currently, candidates for statewide and legislative offices can get public campaign financing. To qualify, a candidate must get a set number of $5 donations to prove support, then agree not to take further money and to limit total spending. The initiative wouldn't alter that. But it would bar public dollars from fueling the fund, effectively wiping out all the available cash. Most of the money now comes from a surcharge on civil, criminal and traffic fines. Eric Crown, chairman of the board of Tempe-based Insight Enterprises, said his real hope is to kill the entire system. Crown, who has put in $30,000 of his own cash to fight public financing, said contributors are just "concerned citizens who are trying to make Arizona a better place to live." That list is heavy with real estate interests. J.W. Teets Enterprises, a real estate and venture capital firm, gave $20,000. There's another $15,000 from Vanderbilt Farms, a firm involved in home building at several locations in Arizona. Fulton Home Sales gave $10,000, as did Tucson developer Donald Diamond, Tucson homebuilder William Estes Jr., the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona and the Arizona Association of Realtors. Donations to candidates are limited to $280 for legislative races and $720 for statewide campaigns, with higher limits for political action committees of at least 500 members. "If any politician is swayed by $200, we have a bigger problem," Crown said. But the law allows lobbyists to collect funds for candidates, which permits "bundling" of contributions from related donors.