Campaign Finance Reform That Makes Sense

I am sure that the bipartisan support this legislation has is do to the fact that both sides think they can benefit from it. I support Substitute 1 for House Bill 128 because it makes sense. Fundraising is a burden made more difficult by having to abide by limits from 1993. If adjusted for CPI, the current local $600 limit would be $982 the statewide limit would be $1965 so the bill is just a long overdue inflation adjustment. When it comes to political parties, the bill falls far short of what is needed. The limits are just going to keep the super Pac’s empowered and undermine the influence of activists in the parties. They especially make it harder for new parties who may only have a couple of high dollar donors. That may be the intention. At least it is a step in the right direction. We are not going to get rid of the influence of money. We may as well lessen the time drain so our leaders can focus on their real job, which is serving us.

This bill raises campaign contribution limits. Specifically, the individual limit for a statewide election goes from $1,200 to $2,000 and, for a non-statewide election, from $600 to $1,000. The bill also raises the limit of contributions from a party to a House of Representatives candidate from $3,000 to $5,000, equal to the State Senate. The bill raises the individual contribution to a party from $20,000 to $30,000. In addition, this bill would also exempt the cost of postage from counting as a donation from a political party to a candidate or candidate committee.