First in the Nation: NC's Judicial Public Financing Program
NC's Model Program of Judicial Public Financing
The success of North Carolina’s judicial campaign reform program stands in sharp contrast to the stream of negative news about campaign finance abuses and pay-to-play politics. Consider these recent newsworthy events, which deserve attention even in the midst of the fascination with “gotcha” stories:
• This is the first year since the state’s judicial public financing program began in 2004 that 100% of the appellate court candidates have signed up to participate in the program. All 11 of the candidates in four contested races have now filed their “declaration of intent.” They must abide by strict fundraising and spending limits and raise at least 350 small qualifying contributions from registered voters before becoming eligible for any public campaign money. A 12th candidate, Appeals Court Judge Sanford Steelman Jr., also signed up early, but since he faces no opposition, he will not receive any public funds.
• Also this week, Gov. Joe Manchin of West Virginia signed into law that state’s pilot judicial public financing program, first scheduled to be used during the 2012 election. West Virginia becomes the third state to adopt a judicial public financing program modeled on North Carolina’s pioneering program. Wisconsin enacted its law in 2009 and New Mexico passed its in 2007.
• In the 2004, 2006 and 2008 general elections in North Carolina, a total of 31 of the 40 (78%) candidates in contested appellate court races qualified for campaign support from the Public Campaign Fund. Five of the seven current members of the N.C. Supreme Court and a majority of the current members of the N.C. Court of Appeals were elected using the program. In general, the program has been used successfully by incumbents and challengers, Republicans and Democrats, blacks and whites, men and women. It has also successfully reduced the reliance of candidates on special-interest donations tied to parties involved in litigation. The percentage of campaign money from lawyers and litigation groups has fallen from 73% of the total in 2002 (before the program) to 14% in 2004 (after the program). This percentage continues to drop.
• The 100% participation rate in 2010 is especially noteworthy after the US Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision to allow corporations to finance independent campaigns for or against candidates, which some commentators suggested could scare candidates away from voluntarily accepting the fundraising limits that go with public campaign support.
• The success of the judicial reform program provides a model for addressing problems of special-interest influences and pay-to-play politics affecting other offices in North Carolina. It was used as the framework for the public financing program for three NC Council of State offices that began in 2008. Legislation to expand that program is now in the NC General Assembly (S-20, H-586), ready for action in the session beginning in May.
