Commenter “Cook” (a Santa Ana community activist, Vietnam vet, and all-around nice guy) started off skeptical last week over Proposition 15, the California Fair Elections Act:
“Prop 15 is another theft of tax dollars: It pays for the elections, ‘the candidates costs,’ from taxpayer funds. hoping that a fee (an uncollectible fee) will recover the tax payer funds.”
This comment puzzled me: In what way would the modest fee on lobbyists be “uncollectible” by their overseer, the Secretary of State? So, having Cook’s phone number, I called to see what the hell he was talking about. It was something he had read, which he later tracked down again and posted here:
“Vern, update on our telephone call:
Courts in Arizona and Vermont have struck down similar statutes that required lobbyists to pay fees to fund political campaigns on the grounds that placing these requirements on lobbyists was an ‘impermissible burden’ on their First Amendment rights.
This is all I have.
I would vote yea, if the funding part will pass constitutional muster.”
Well, it is true that that happened in Arizona and Vermont, and we also fully expect the lobbyists’ union (The “Institute of Governmental Advocates”) to sue if and when Prop 15 passes. But the situation is very different here, 
and they will have a much weaker case. In Arizona and Vermont, lobbyists were asked to pay for ALL state elections; in this case, they’re only covering the election for Secretary of State, the office that directly regulates and oversees them. We have run this past several legal and constitutional experts and fully expect to prevail.
Cook’s connected concern, that if we lose the lawsuit taxpayers will be left holding the bag (a very modest bag anyway for this one office) is also unfounded: If by some chance we lose the lawsuit then the whole thing falls apart.
Another fact which should ease concerns: The fees will begin to be collected THIS YEAR as soon as the measure passes; while the first election to be paid out of that kitty will be the next SOS election in 2014: time to get much more than the needed funds, and iron out any difficulties.
I don’t believe I’ve yet mentioned the figures we’re talking about. Currently, each of the 1,239 registered lobbyists in Sacramento (truly, you can’t stroll ten feet down the hallowed halls of our Capitol without banging into one) pays TWELVE DOLLARS a year for the privilege of lobbying. This bill would bring that up to $350 – that’s as much as they make in one hour. So it’s certainly not unfair; three different lobbyists have told me off the record that, even though their organization opposes it on principle, they “don’t mind paying their fair share.”
The real reason the lobbyists’ organization (IGA) will sue is not over the money, but because this begins to chip away at the outsize power they wield in our government. Dilute it. Which is a good thing for all the rest of us.
Cook concluded with “I would vote yea, if the funding part will pass constitutional muster.” It will, Cook should vote yea, and so should you!
We shall see. Lets hope for a great turn out the June.