What are Clean Elections, or Publicly Financed Elections?

 South Carolina Elected Leaders for Clean Elections

Clean elections is a system whereby voters finance the campaigns of qualified candidates who agree to spending limits and pledge not to take private donations. Clean elections allow any citizen to qualify for public funding to run for office and reduce the nearly absolute power of money and incumbency.

Clean elections help leverage the vitality and fairness of democratic elections in South Carolina because any eligible citizen, regardless of personal wealth, can run for public office. It is also designed to protect the rights of voters and candidates from the detrimental effects of increasingly large amounts of money being raised and spent in South Carolina to influence the outcome of elections. The investment by taxpayers to finance campaigns will be repaid by state policies that balance their needs against those of the special interests that currently own the elections.

The system is voluntary and constitutional. While it can apply to all elections, the clean elections plan outlined here applies to candidates for the legislature and statewide offices.

Who own the elections now?

Of the $18,744,967 raised by all candidates in the 1998 general election, less than 6 percent came from contributions of $200 or less. Business interests, including banking, insurance, real estate, lawyers, health, construction, utilities, transportation, communication and agriculture gave 74.2 percent of the total raised. The candidates themselves contributed 16 percent.

• The average cost of winning a Senate seat rose 100 percent between 1996 and 2000 (from $51,537 to $102,780).
• Nearly half (22 of 46) of Senate races were uncontested in the 2000 general election.
• The average cost of winning a House seat rose 43 percent between 1998 and 2000 ($20,027 to $28,773).
• 60 percent (76 of 124) House races were uncontested in 2000.
• 92 percent of the winners (122 of 133) in the 1998 general election were the candidates who raised the most money.
• 89 percent of the winners were incumbents.
• 95.5 percent of the winners were either incumbents, spent the most money, or both.

How a candidate would qualify for public financing:

• Declare their intent to be a publicly funded candidate and pledge to accept no private donations after raising a specified amount of "seed money."
• Raise a minimum number of small qualifying contributions ($5) from registered voters in their districts that would indicate public support:
  • 200 for House ($1,000)
  • 400 for Senate ($2,000)
  • 1,500 for Statewide offices ($7,500)
  • 4,000 for Governor ($20,000)
• Submit the names to the Election Commission to be qualified as a publicly financed candidate.
• accept spending limits.
• use funds only for campaign purposes.
• return any unused funds to the Election Commission.

How much would it cost for South Carolina voters to own the elections?

A system of publicly financed elections in South Carolina that would provide generous funding for candidates would cost the voting age citizens of our state $3.44 a year, less than a penny a day. The $10 million annual cost of publicly financed elections is less than .002 percent of the 2000 state budget. Another way to look at this cost, is to consider that taxpayers spent $30 million last year to run a legislature that is primarily financed by special interests. We could own the elections for less than 2 percent of what we spent last year ($518 million) to maintain our highways.

This cost was figured on the very generous basis of averaging the amount raised by the winners of the last two legislative elections and the average cost of statewide races. This amount is multiplied by 2.5 percent to cover the unlikely event of all candidates for all offices running with public financing. This amount also creates a very generous surplus to fund publicly financed candidates up to 300 percent of the original amount if they are outspent by privately financed candidates. Based on the recent experience of Maine, where a third of the candidates were publicly financed, it is likely that initial voter owned elections in South Carolina would cost less than half this amount.

Publicly financed House candidates would get $25,000 (up to $75,000 if they are outspent by a privately financed candidate). Average contributions to winning House candidate in the last two election cycles: $24,400 x 2.5 candidates per seat x 124 House seats divided by the two year election cycle, divided by the voting age population (2,964,300) = $1.27 per adult per year.

Publicly financed Senate candidates would get $77,000 (up to $231,000 if they are outspent by a privately financed candidate). Average contributions to winning a Senate candidate in the last two election cycles: $77,176 x 2.5 candidates x 46 Senate seats divided by the four year cycle, divided by the VAP = $0.74 per adult per year.

Constitutional Officers would get the average amount raised in the last general election: Total of average amounts raised in 1998 statewide office races $7,740,109. Publicly financed candidates would be eligible for up to 200 percent of the original grants below. These amounts can be adjusted (some up, some down) and still allow generous funding within this price calculation.
Governor: $4,755,330
Lt. Gov: $879,541
Super. Education: $699,460
Attorney General: $472,804
Comptroller Gen: $244,732
Treasurer: $271,333
Adj. Gen.: $167,781
Sec. State: $50,980
x 2.5 candidates per seat divided by four year election cycle divided by the VAP = $1.68 per adult per year.

TOTAL COST OF PUBLIC ELECTIONS: $3.44 annually, per voting age citizen. Less than a penny a day per person, or $10,197,192 per year.

It can be strongly argued that the amount of money for the public to own the elections could be substantially less than these calculations. These figures are intended to be attractive to the incumbent legislators who will have to approve any system of public financing and to show that Voter Owned elections are affordable.

The dollar amounts for the campaigns were taken from the candidates' financial disclosure records at the state Ethics Commission and reflect the amount raised by candidates. The population numbers are from the State Data System of the Budget and Control Board.

It's a good idea, but will it work?

Last year, Maine became the first state to hold a full general election with publicly financed candidates. 116 out of 352 candidates chose to participate in the "Clean Election" program. 63 percent were Democrats, 34 percent Republicans and 32 percent were incumbents. Almost half the races had at least one "clean" candidate. There was more competition, with a 40 percent increase in contested primaries and an increase in the number of women running for office. One-third of Maine's legislature was elected without any ties to special interests money (17 of 35 Senate seats and 45 of 151 House seats). 54 percent of the Clean Election candidates won, many receiving supplemental funds to keep pace with their opponent's spending.

This fact sheet was prepared by the South Carolina Progressive Network with the help of the National Institute on Money in State Politics. The Network can be reached at 803-808-3384 or network@scpronet. South Carolina Elected Leaders for Clean Elections