State Lawmakers Have $1.5 Million In Campaign Accounts
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Pension reform may dominate the conversation on Smith Hill these days, but that isn’t stopping some state legislators from kicking their fundraising efforts into full gear.
A GoLocalProv review of campaign finance reports shows state lawmakers combine to have nearly $1.5 million in their campaign accounts, with less than 14 percent of the General Assembly controlling over half the funds.
As of June 30, State Representatives and Senators had stashed away $1,433,523.67, a number that is sure to increase when elected officials file their third quarter campaign finance reports at the end of the month.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTSpeaker, Senate Judiciary Chair Top List
At the top of the heap is Speaker of the House Gordon Fox, who reported an ending balance of $174,646.21 in his last filing. The only other General Assembly member with more than $100,000 in their account is Senate Judiciary Chairman Michael McCaffrey with $131,524.62.
Rounding out the top five accounts are Sen. William Walaska ($80,835.67), Rep. Brian Patrick Kennedy ($76,102.55) and Joseph A. Trillo ($75,654.75). Senate President M. Teresa Paiva Weed reported having $37,958.26 as of the end of June.
Only three General Assembly members report having no money in their accounts: Rep. Jeremiah O'Grady, Rep. Leo Medina and Rep. Daniel Gordon. Medina and Gordon have made headlines this month after each lawmaker was arrested on unrelated charges.
Too Much Time Fundraising
The amount of fundraising taking place on Smith Hill is a cause for concern for some good government groups. Common Cause RI Executive Director John Marion said he routinely sees legislators leaving committee hearings to attend fundraisers.
“We think members of the General Assembly spend way too much time fundraising, and it's a big distraction from their duties as lawmakers,” Marion said. “Many nights of the legislative session we see legislators leaving committee hearings to attend fundraisers, which is disappointing to say the least. Even worse, we see leadership having large fundraisers right at the end of the session before many of the most important issues in the state are being decided.”
The solution is simple, according to Marion. The state ought to create a system of public financing for elected officials.
“We believe there should be a system of public financing so that qualified candidates don't have to worry about this,” he said. “We have also supported the concept of banning fundraisers during the legislative session, although we have not proposed a bill on that yet.”
Transparency Is The Key
But it’s not just the time elected officials are spending raising funds that voters should be concerned about; it’s where the funds are coming from, according to Brown University Political Science Professor Wendy Schiller.
Schiller said only raising money from one side can lead General Assembly members to fail to consider both sides of a particular issue before they vote.
“The issue is not that the members of the GA raise money, it is who they raise money from,” Schiller said. “If they rely too heavily on one source of campaign financing that has a particular viewpoint, then voters should worry about their commitment to considering both sides of an issue. The alternative is to try to raise money from a wide range of sources, which takes more of their time, but means that they rely on a bigger set of interests for their reelection effort.”
Schiller said voters should calls for more transparency among elected officials.
“Above all, voters should demand clear access to the campaign finance records of members of the General Assembly, and to make sure that all Rhode Island elected officials pay their fines for violating campaign finance rules,” she said.
RIC Professor: Fundraising Ban A Possible Answer
The overwhelming majority of funds are held by some of the highest ranking General Assembly members. Walaska, for example is the Senate Deputy Majority Whip and Kennedy is chairman of the House Corporations Committee. Combined, just a dozen lawmakers have more than 50 percent of the total campaign funds.
Part of the problem, according the Rhode Island College Professor of Political Communication Valerie Endress is that the state allows elected officials to fundraise during the session. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 28 states place restrictions on giving and receiving campaign contributions during the legislative session.
“Over 50% of the states have passed a law prohibiting members of the GA from fundraising during the legislative session. Rhode Island does not,” Endress said. “The logic behind the ban is that accepting campaign contributions at the same time assembly members are casting votes may lead to a conflict of interest. It’s all about the appearance of impropriety—and rightfully so. Individuals, lobbyists, or interest groups may have legislation pending, and campaign contributions may be seen as a way to gain additional leverage.”
Endress said a ban during the session could limit the influence of money.
“While campaign fundraising and the time devoted to the task is an absolute necessity, there are ways in which states have sought to limit the influence of money, and banning in-session fundraising at least curtails the length of the fundraising season” Endress said.
If you valued this article, please LIKE GoLocalProv.com on Facebook by clicking HERE.
