Big campaign finance change draws little interest
Not a soul testified this morning for or against a bill (SB1038) removing Missouri’s campaign contribution limits.
But the 8:15 a.m. public hearing did include a pointed exchange between the bill’s sponsor, Senate Majority Leader Charlie Shields, R-St. Joseph, and freshman Rep. Michael Frame, D-Eureka.
Shields’ argument for removing the caps rests on this fact: Big donors find ways around them. That makes it hard to track the money in politics.
But Frame contended Shields’ logic was flawed, saying that “we can do transparency without removing caps.”
The representative said removing the limits was a bad idea because lobbyists can tap deep pockets and write big checks but “those back home see themselves as locked out of the process, because they can’t write those checks.”
Frame said constituents “think we’re in a different world. This is why they draw those kinds of conclusions.”
Shields responded with a little history. One of the most senior legislators, he won his first legislative election in 1990, before Missouri had contribution limits. Shields said “campaigns were cleaner” then because candidates controlled their message.
They didn’t have to worry about interference by scores of independent committees, political party committees and other PACs that are used to get around the limits now.
“People believe limits keep the money out of politics. What I argue is they keep transparency out of politics,” Shields said.
As for voters’ perceptions, Shields said: “If they think politicians are bought and sold, at least they want to know who they’re bought and sold by.”
(3 votes, average: 3 out of 5)
Loading ...
Is it that there is little interest, or little hope that the pols will do the right thing?
The latter, I suspect.