Campaign finance suggestion poses $5 test for candidates

Opponents object to the $1.3 million cost of a proposal for public financing of campaigns for city positions

Saturday, November 13, 2004

HENRY STERN

First, the City Club listened Friday for an hour to advocates for publicly financed campaigns in Portland. Then came the timely "devil's advocate" question from a fellow backer of the idea.

Why does Portland still need taxpayer financing of City Hall campaigns after Tom Potter limited donations in his mayoral campaign to $100 and easily defeated the well-financed Jim Francesconi last week?

The answer from city Auditor Gary Blackmer: Potter's victory represents strong public sentiment in Portland for reforming a campaign finance system where candidates must raise more money each election. Blackmer, one of the earlier speakers, said Potter's name familiarity and credibility enabled him to fall into the exception-rather-than the-rule category.

"It was such an anomaly of what we expected in elections," said Blackmer, who along with Commissioner Erik Sten has developed a voluntary system where candidates could qualify for public financing by collecting a set number of $5 donations.

Of 114 City Hall campaigns since 1970, the higher-spending candidate got the most votes 87 percent of the time, Blackmer told the audience. And in the majority of other instances, the spending differential was minor.

The proposal is likely to pass when the new City Council takes office next year. On the campaign trail, Potter and Commissioner-elect Sam Adams pledged to vote for the proposal, saying the system needs change. Both attended the City Club forum Friday.

The proposal would require mayoral candidates interested in tapping public financing to collect 1,500 $5 checks to qualify for $200,000 in a primary and $250,000 in a general election. Candidates for city commissioner and auditor would need 1,000 $5 checks to qualify for $150,000 in a primary and $200,000 in a general election.

Potter and Adams are expected to make a majority with Sten on the new five-person council in favor of the idea for the 2006 election cycle. Local opponents have objected to the proposal's annual cost, estimated at $1.3 million. Supporters stress that's a fraction of 1 percent out of the city's general-fund budget, with Blackmer calling it a "small price to pay" at the equivalent of about $2.45 per resident.

Commissioner Randy Leonard, fresh off defeating a group of candidates united to beat him last May, also has questioned the fairness of the idea. His objection: each member of a group targeting a candidate would get the same amount of public money as the targeted candidate.

And Commissioner Dan Saltzman has raised concerns about taxpayer money being misused for out-of-state travel for candidates, mileage reimbursement, vehicle purchases, salaries for candidates' relatives or expenses such as buying tickets.

Five states and 12 local governments in the United States have some form of public campaign financing. Supporters of the idea from two of those states, North Carolina and Arizona, talked up the strengths of the concept Thursday and Friday to the City Club and other groups in Portland.

For Marc Spitzer, an Arizona Republican who successfully ran statewide under the public financing system for state corporation commissioner, it's a question of getting to spend time with actual voters instead of dialing the rich and powerful for cash.

For Rev. Carrie Bolton, acting director of the Fannie Lou Hamer Project, it's a question of civil rights when people of color are denied a political voice because they don't have equal access to campaign money.

"When we get to the table of decision-making, all of God's children should be reflected," said Bolton, a North Carolina church pastor. "We do not have a true democracy until that happens."

Henry Stern: 503-294-5988 henrystern@news.oregonian.com