OVEC's home page features links to environmental news on the web
Archive list of "E"- Notes newsletters

Click links below to read articles online, or try the PDF version to view or print an exact replica of the paper newsletter. 

December 2007
Contents

Judge: Valley Fill Damages Trump $$$ Lost
20 Years of Standing Our Ground
Changing Course: Windcall and the Art of Renewal
Highlights of OVEC’s History 20 Years of STANDING OUR GROUND
State Supreme Court Upholds Verdict Against Coal Company Over Destroyed Water Wells
Sludge Safety Project Makes Progress on Study
OSM Gets an Earful on Plan to Weaken Mining Rules
65 Percent of Americans Oppose Bush Plan for Buffer Zone Rules 
West Virginia Council of Churches Statement on Mountaintop Removal
Good Blue Dogs Helping to Raise Funds for OVEC This Christmas
Praying for the Land and People Victimized by MTR
Update on Blair Mountain
Strip Mining Damages Nature
A Note from Maria Gunnoe
David vs. Goliath Award Goes to OVEC’s Boone County Organizer
Tips on Writing a Letter to the Editor - Do It TODAY!
Clean Politics = Public Financing - It Really Is That Simple
Clean Elections: Control How You Pay for Politics
Piper Fund’s Challenge Grant Goal Exceeded! THANKS!!!!!
Eastern Panhandle Woman Pushes for Clean Elections
Why Don’t Regulators Do Their Jobs? OVEC Answers
Delegate Wants Public Financing Law
OVEC Works! Thanks!
Public Energy Authority Not Serving Public: Manchin’s Coal-to-Liquids Energy Plan Gets Little Support
Mingo Residents Gather to Celebrate, Better their County
The Appalachian Adventure
Oh, Yeah, That's A Great Spot for A Mountaintop Removal Mine!
This Summer’s Story – Voices of Those Hurt by Mountaintop Removal Mining
Ink Cartridge Recycling Program Sinks, But You Can Still EAT FOR OVEC
This Can’t Happen in America, Can It?  No, Only in Central Appalachia - So Far
Miscellany


For viewing the PDF version of the newsletter

 
Winds of Change Newsletter, December 2007     See sidebar for table of contents

Clean Politics = Public Financing - It Really Is That Simple

Nov. 2, 2007, Charleston Gazette editorial

For five years, a group of concerned West Virginians have been trying to convince the Legislature to create public financing for legislative seats.

West Virginians would have more interest in running for office and more confidence in the process if races for state Senate and House of Delegates were more open to people of modest means, argues a coalition of groups, including West Virginia Citizens for Clean Elections, Citizen Action Group, the Affiliated Construction Trades Foundation, the West Virginia Council of Churches and the Wheeling-Charleston Diocese.

The version proposed would work like this:

In House races, a candidate must raise at least 250 contributions of $5 from supporters in his or her own district. That would qualify the candidate for $22,500 to $67,500 in public campaign funds.

In return, candidates must pledge not to accept other outside contributions or spend personal money on the campaign. Candidates whose opponents don’t take the pledge and who are big spenders may apply for more taxpayer money.

At first glance, it may sound like welfare for politicians, but it’s not, says Sen. Dan Foster, D-Kanawha. His view is backed by Adam Smith, a Parkersburg native now with Public Campaign in Washington. "Citizens are already paying for the way elections are financed," Smith says.

The current system rewards legislative candidates funded by big private donors – and winners pass tax breaks and other laws benefiting those donors. It erodes the public’s confidence in their representatives, Smith said during a meeting with Gazette staff members.

In the past, we have voiced concern that a large fundamentalist church could recruit a dozen members to be candidates against abortion, gays and the like – then ask 250 members to cough up $5 donations, enabling the group to run on taxpayer money. The same might be done by a labor union, KKK chapter or other organized movement.

"We haven’t seen that as a problem in other states," Smith said. On the contrary, he said, Arizona, for example, saw donations come from a more diverse group of supporters. All the participating states have more candidates running for office and fewer unopposed races. By requiring donations to come from within a candidates’ district, it would also discourage widespread groups from dominating a ballot at taxpayer expense.

West Virginia’s bill (SB118 during the last session) made it out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, but did not emerge from the Finance Committee.

The state chapter of the National Association of Social Workers, plus the League of Women Voters and the AFL-CIO are among 25 organizations supporting publicly financed legislative campaigns in West Virginia. Together, they represent about 900,000 state residents.

 

   Smart Counter Details   OVEC Home   Issues   Contact   Join   Site Map