I know that VOICE has nearly universal support in the blogging world and among activists, but the truth is that it is definitely not happening this cycle and unlikely to happen in the future without a serious accounting of how Iowa campaigns are run, both by Democrats and Republicans.
Exhibit 1: Mike Gronstal’s 2006 third quarter campaign finance report (pdf).
Exhibit 2: Mary Lundby’s 2006 third quarter campaign finance report (pdf).
Both of these show six-figure donations and expenditures for Senators not even up for election in 2006. They don’t represent even close to all the centralized money in Iowa politics, either.
The reason you see so much party-line activity in Iowa politics is because all the money is controlled by leadership. If you cross them too much you can expect to have a very difficult time raising money in your next election, and everyone hates to raise money. If you are a team player though your seat will be defended and you can focus more on shaking hands and kissing babies.
If Iowa implemented VOICE, leadership’s power would disappear. Naturally, then, it is going to be very hard to convince Gronstal or Murphy to buy into something that will work to marginalize them. And with Republicans temperamentally opposed to any sort of campaign finance reform, there is next to no chance of getting this passed without their support.
I don’t see VOICE being passed by 2008, nor necessarily should it be. Ed Fallon isn’t our governor. Elections have consequences. But we should keep pushing it this year, and we should do our best to make it a voting issue in 2008. With the Presidential races expected to combine to over a billion dollars, we’ve got the context for it. With caucus coverage more expansive than ever, we’ve got the microphone. And with luck and a little work, in 2008 we’ll have the votes.
4 Comments
You're confusing me---
You say the bill can’t pass because so much money now goes thru the leaders who will block the bill. But you say we’ll have more votes for it after 2008. What will change?
You say the context for the bill to pass is found in the billion dollar campaign that’s coming up. That’s the same context that prevents the bill now–private contributions going to powerful names.
You say the bill shouldn’t pass under Culver because the consequence of failing to elect Fallon is that Fallon’s ideas will die. But if we’d had VOICE in 2006, Fallon might have won. Culver got Fallon’s support by promising campaign finance reform, I believe.
I don’t see you pushing for a VOICE in this post. I see you rationalizing its defeat. How about appealing to Gronstal’s and Murphy’s sense of democratic patriotism instead of excusing their appetites for power?
iowavoter Mon 2 Apr 2:25 PM
I'm not pushing for it in the post
I want VOICE but not everything I write is advocacy. There won’t automatically be more votes for in 2008. We need to make sure that we are putting all democrats on the record about it. This wouldn’t have happened this year if we did that in 2006. Well I guess it might have anyway, with fair share going how it is.
simon-stevenson Tue 3 Apr 12:42 AM
Gronstal told me he was for public financing
A year or two ago I raised this issue with Gronstal (not the specific bill in question, the optional public financing system as used in Maine and Arizona). He told me the Democratic-controlled legislature passed a similar bill in 1992, but Branstad vetoed it. He said he would pass a bill like this if we had Democrats in control of the legislature and the governor’s mansion. Otherwise he was not going to waste time on it.
Last year I heard that Gronstal was not against this, but Pat Murphy was. Why I don’t know. It seems like the House has always been the bigger hurdle when it comes to this legislation. I can’t understand Murphy’s position. Progressives in Maine have been hugely empowered by the optional public financing of elections.
desmoinesdem Mon 2 Apr 10:41 PM
VOICE = Act of the Possible
Regardless of all the cynicism that prevails in the political world, I still beleive in the notion that it’s up to the people to advocate and demand change, and hold those elected officials accountable for turning a blind eye to change. VOICE is still alive and it’s up to us, not just the blogsphere but all voters, to begin urging, if not demanding change. People have grown tired of all the money parlayed into politics and if properly educated about VOICE, I’m confident they will advocate this change as well.
In the meantime there’s still time to advocate and demand our leaders push VOICE dthrough committee, and should leadership ignore us, then it’s our responsibility to hold them accountable.
So keep contacting Murphy et. al, and better yet, pen an LTE to your local newspaper and all the other papers in Iowa about VOICE. Let the education process begin.
tmlindsey Tue 3 Apr 11:17 AM