Steve Lopez Editorializes on Prop 89

Prop 89, on the November ballot, would create public financing of state political campaigns, while also placing significant limits on business contributions to initiative campaigns. Now, public campaign financing is a complicated wonkish topic with good arguments on sides. However, this relatively popular appeal has been shackled to a severe anti-business limit, which allows corporations to put only up to $10,000 into campaigns for or against a particular initiative. Given the large-dollar campaigns which routinely target specific and limited industries, this would give impacted companies little to no opportunity to debate these measures on the campaign trail (Proposition 87, taxing California oil producers, is an example: only a handful of oil companies produce oil from California wells, so instead of raising a few million dollars to combat this threat to their industry, producers would be able to raise and spend only tens of thousands of dollars in opposition-a huge swing). Of course, no similar limits are placed upon unions, who can continue to fund initiatives with impunity.

Now, some unions are also opposed to Prop 89, which was placed on the ballot by another union (the California Nurses Association), but for different reasons. Public financing of campaigns will severely reduce their ability to play kingmaker in Democratic primaries.

Unfortunately, Lopez (whose columns I usually rather like) diagnoses all opposition as simply opposition to a loss of influence and as a threat to the pay-to-play style that rules Sacramento. Now, there is some truth to this, but important nuances (admittedly more than a single column may have room to cover) differentiate why certain groups oppose this measure. And of course, an increase of business taxes by $200,000,000 a year to pay for it hardly increases the attractiveness of the measure.

I think its also worth noting that contrary to Lopez's assertions, many businesses would favor significant but fair reforms to campaign finance. No business glories in being constatly hit up for cash; it adds to their cost of doing business without providing any guaranteed investment, hardly a good business investment. However, lopsided reform with clear and unequal losers is not the way to go.

Full Lopez column