Court decision to impact Clean Election Act
A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that declared an Arizona law unconstitutional will force Maine to rewrite part of its Clean Election program.
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court found unconstitutional Arizona's law allowing publicly funded candidates to receive more funds if they are outspent by their privately funded competitors, according to the Bangor Daily News. The court said that matching funds violate the First Amendment because they "inhibit robust and wide-open political debate without sufficient justification." Arizona's law is nearly identical to Maine's, which gives lawmakers running under the public financing system matching funds if their privately financed opponents spend more, or if outside groups spend money to oppose a publicly financed candidate. The provision was previously targeted in a 2010 lawsuit filed by current and former state representatives and the Respect Maine PAC, and backed by the Maine Heritage Policy Center. But a federal appeals court last October rejected their motion to suspend the provision, citing the impending November election. In 2010, 77% of legislative candidates participated in the Clean Election program, which requires participants to collect a certain number of $5 seed money contributions and reject private contributions.
Since the court's decision was expected, a bill seeking to rework Maine's Clean Election Act is already under consideration by the Legislature. It directs the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices, which handles the Clean Election program, to study the ruling and suggest changes to Maine's law to a legislative committee by Dec. 1. It's unclear, however, if Gov. Paul LePage will support expenditures to fund the study, since he has previously spoken in favor of ending public campaign financing for gubernatorial candidates. The Legislature, which reconvenes today, is scheduled to take up the bill before the end of the 2011 session.
Most Recent
Most Recent
Comments