Want a Competitive Governor's Race? Wait Until Campaign Finance Reform Occurs

Don’t bet on much electoral reform at all in Oregon until the people or the Legislature tackle the Elephant in Oregon’s Political Front Room: Campaign Finance Reform

Another election season is dawning in Oregon. This time around much attention will focus on sorting out the candidates for governor. Early on well-known Sen. Betsy Johnson, I-Scappoose, is muddling the scene.

Johnson is running “unaffiliated.” That means when the May primary election rolls around most of Oregon’s 2.9 million registered voters won’t be able to cast a ballot for her. It’s the result of the state allowing political parties to have “closed” primary elections – restricted to voters registered to their party. This closed primary will produce two candidates favored by Democrats (with 1,026,313 registered voters) and Republicans (with 729,676 registered voters).  

Johnson will earn a place on the November ballot with a petition containing signatures of at least 1 percent of those voting in the 2020 general election. That’s just under 24,000 valid signatures.

The emergence of a political block tired of the two party system helps explain why Johnson will so easily qualify. Johnson said she grew up a Republican and became a Democrat as the GOP “moved too far to the right.” In an email sent to supporters last month she said, “Having to choose between another left-wing liberal promising more of the same or a right-wing Trump apologist — is no choice at all.” Another reason is because Johnson has deep pockets herself and several friends with their fair share of financial capital.

Johnson’s declaration prompted The Oregonian/Oregon Live to editorialize, urging both major political parties to voluntarily open their May primary elections to nonaffiliated voters. The parties could make that choice internally, without a change in Oregon law (a decision they’ve made in prior elections).

Don’t bet on that happening with either party this time around. In fact, don’t bet on much electoral reform at all in Oregon until the people or the Legislature tackle the Elephant in Oregon’s Political Front Room: Campaign Finance Reform.

Our problem has its roots in one of this nation’s most specific constitutional free-speech clauses:

No law shall be passed restraining the free expression of opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write, or print freely on any subject whatever; but every person shall be responsible for the abuse of this right.

Article 1, Section 8 Oregon Constitution.

The courts have repeatedly found unconstitutional legislative and initiative efforts to reign in political spending. After voter-approved campaign spending limits passed in November 1994, the Oregon Supreme Court two years later found that seven sections of Measure 9 violated the Oregon Constitution’s free-speech clause.

“[W]e conclude that both campaign contributions and expenditures are forms of expression for the purposes of Article I, Section 8,” wrote the court’s majority in their 1996 opinion.

You can read part of what resulted in a four-part series published by The Oregonian in 2019. Click here. Reporter Rob Davis built his series around links between Oregon campaign finance law and how government dealt with environmental issues.

“Oregon’s failure to regulate campaign cash has made it one of the biggest money states in American politics,” Davis wrote. “The flood of money created an easy regulatory climate where industry gets what it wants, again and again.”

Among his findings:

• Oregon is one of 11 states allowing people to give as much as they want to political candidates.

• Oregon is one of five states with no limits on campaign contributions.

• On a per capita basis, Oregon ranks first among the 50 states in corporate giving to political campaigns.

The Oregonian looked at 114,000 transactions between 2008 and 2018 involving state legislator’s use of a total of $83 million in campaign contributions. It found that $2.2 million of that spending would have violated the law in at least one other state. The two largest categories were out-of-state travel and family members on campaign payrolls. Oregon allows use of campaign money for expenses “connected with” a legislator’s official duties.

Voters passed Measure 107, a constitutional amendment, in November 2020. It authorizes both the Legislature and local governments to limit campaign contributions and expenditures. The measure earned approval of 78 percent of voters.

So what happened in the 2021 session? Bills that would limit campaign contributions were on the sidelines when the Legislature adjourned.

Honest Elections Oregon, a political action committee which promoted passage of Measure 107, is working on a couple of initiatives which would implement the new constitutional amendment. Dan Meek, part of leadership at Honest Elections, says draft language would include disclaimer requirements, contribution limits and additional disclosure requirements. One version of the initiative would include some form of public funding of campaigns for statewide office. Meek says the draft initiatives use statutory language rather than proposing constitutional amendments.

While Honest Elections works on its initiatives, the cash flows into Oregon’s pending gubernatorial races. Nick Kristof, the Yamhill native and former New York Times columnist made recent headlines with an initial campaign finance report showing $1 million in donations. Days later, Johnson announced an even bigger piggy bank — more than $2 million.

Retired journalist. Former Jackson County Commissioner. Born in Corvallis, 1934; graduate of Oregon State

Photo credit: "DONATE HERE : sacramento, california (2015)" by he who would be lost is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0