The Register published an article this week about campaign finance reform activist Shirley Grindle’s latest effort – which is to amend her Tin Cup campaign finance ordinance to prevent “candidates running for county office can only use money raised specifically for a local race.” Grindle also wants to establish a county ethics commission to help enforce the Tin Cup provisions.
Predictably Jubal/Cunningham, over at Red County/OC Blog, ripped Grindle’s plan. Here is part of what he had to say about her latest announcement, “Does it ever occur to Shirley it his her TIN CUP contribution limits that put the local candidate at a disadvantage? If it does, it is a truth she’s not prepared to face, because her fail-safe response is to advocate even more stringent restrictions on our political free speech.”
I don’t have a problem with Grindle’s proposals – candidates should not be playing shell games with campaign accounts. If they raise money for a legislative race and don’t use it, they should have to give it back to the donors. As for the ethics commission, that is truly needed as our County District Attorney, Tony Rackauckas, does not enforce Tin Cup. He is afraid to go after his political cronies. Instead he refers the matters, if at all, to the State Attorney General. Not good! We need local enforcement.
However, Grindle also needs to give a little, if indeed she wants the Supervisors to make these changes and put the revised ordinance on the ballot. For one thing, we need to raise the Tin Cup contribution limits to at least $2,500. We also need to index the limits to inflation. If she is unwilling to compromise, then let her get the signatures and put the measure on the ballot herself.
I spent some time with Grindle while Tim Whitacre was trying to establish his own ethics committee, and while she is a great historian and her heart is in the right place, she is terribly difficult to work with. She is arrogant and sometimes unable to see the consequences of her actions. But she is right more often than not, and we will have to see if she is willing to water down her Tin Cup in order to get the changes she wants. I won’t be holding my breath!
Pedroza/Art:
“Predictably”?
Why is that, Art?
And why do you think contribution limits need to be raised?
Shirley has the background to push this to victory. Today she is looking into Mayor Mark( Boss Hog)Murphy not reporting hundreds of dollars of free Angels tickets he has recieved from Toyota of Orange.It looks like another scandal for Orange.
Jubal/Cunningham,
Let me break this to you gently – you are a political consultant. That means you have a vested interest in raising contribution limits. Ergo the use of the word “predictably.” Plus you never miss a chance to rip Tin Cup!
As for why I want the contribution limits raised – let’s be honest, Tin Cup has not kept up with the cost of living. $1,500 does not buy much when it comes to political campaigning. $2,500 would be a fair limit. And indexing it to inflation would allow this ordinance to keep up with the times.
The other factor that Tin Cup does not address is independent expenditures. Obviously IE’s skirt Tin Cup altogether. Thus the need to raise the limits so candidates can better compete against folks like Lou Correa who benefit from thousands of dollars in IE’s that are bought on their behalf – allegedly wihtout their knowledge.
Pedroza/Art:
Let me break this to you gently – you are a political consultant.
Let me break this to you gently: you don’t know what you are talking about. Not that that ever stops you. I’d say campaign consulting is about 10% of my business.
That means you have a vested interest in raising contribution limits.
You could abolish contribution limits tomorrow, and the impact on my consultancy would be zero. My opposition to contribution limits is philosophical.
Plus you never miss a chance to rip Tin Cup!
That’s because it is an idiotic law with which I strongly disagree. It’s called “consistency.”
As for why I want the contribution limits raised – let’s be honest, Tin Cup has not kept up with the cost of living. $1,500 does not buy much when it comes to political campaigning.
Let me break this to you gently, Art: TIN CUP is already indexed for inflation. It can be increased by the CPI in January of odd-numbered years. Grindle included it in TIN CUP, but your heroine went into apoplexy in January 2003 when the Supes actually did what the law allows and raised the contribution limit from $1,000 to $1,400, and to $1,500 in 2005. This January I expect they will raise it again.
$2,500 would be a fair limit. And indexing it to inflation would allow this ordinance to keep up with the times.
Why is $2,500 fair, Art? Based on what standard or criteria? Why not $2,505? Or $5,000? Or $7,613,59? It’s completely arbitrary. You’re just pulling a number of of your head and saying, “That’s sounds about right.”
The other factor that Tin Cup does not address is independent expenditures. Obviously IE’s skirt Tin Cup altogether.
Yeah, that pesky 1st Amendment really gets in the way!
Thus the need to raise the limits so candidates can better compete against folks like Lou Correa who benefit from thousands of dollars in IE’s that are bought on their behalf – allegedly wihtout their knowledge.
You’ve conceded the principle, Art. Why cling to this failed notion that contribution limits make campaigns any “cleaner”?
Besides, IEs can work against incumbents, as well.
Art, I don’t have a problem with reforms that address transfers between campaigns. I think TIN CUP ought to be amended to require a state legislator to receive permission from each donor before “cleaning” that donors contribution from a state account into a county account. I support this out of concern for the contributor, who may find him/herself in a situation where that contribution to a state legislator may find its way into a county campaign account to be used against another candidate whom the donor supports in that county race. In other words, a donor could find his/her contribution being used against the candidate he/she actually is supporting.
If Murphy has taken free tickets is that a crime? Are the police or DA involved?
Mark Murphy’s wife is the right hand person to the owner of Toyota of Orange. Most likely they are Toyota of Orange season tickets that she gets. No scandal here.