|
Angus King on Government Reform
Independent Former ME Governor
|
|
|
Unaffiliated super PACs exist only in fevered imaginations
Mr. King said he would be on guard for attacks from opponents who use outside groups that are nominally independent to deflect responsibility. "The idea of an unaffiliated 'super PAC' exists only in the fevered imagination of Nino Scalia," he said, spitt
Source: New York Times, "Senate Control Could Hinge on Angus"
, May 6, 2012
States Rights: code for 1840s slavery; & 1950s segregation
In the 1840s, you'll find passages eerily similar to what we're hearing today, complete with references to the Second and Tenth Amendments, enumerated powers, the right of secession, and even the Boston Tea Party. I came of age in the South in the 1950s,
when exactly the same (and I mean EXACTLY THE SAME) arguments and impassioned rhetoric poured forth in response to the rising tide of the civil rights movement. Yes, the Civil War was about "states' rights," but not as an abstract principle, as some woul
argue. It was about a state's right to maintain slavery. Period. If you don't believe me, google "South Carolina Secession Declaration."By the same token, everyone (on both sides of the civil rights debate) understood that all the state's rights-Tenth
Amendment-tyranny of the 1950s federal government rhetoric wasn't being deployed in the service of some abstract principle of federalism: it was all about a state's right to maintain segregation. Period.
And now we're hearing it all again.
Source: Governor`s Travels, by Gov. Angus King, p. 47
, Aug 16, 2011
Restrict and disclose all campaign donations & spending
Q: Do you support limiting the following types of contributions to state legislative candidates: Individual?A: Yes.
Q: PAC?
A: Yes.
Q: Corporate?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you support requiring full and timely disclosure of campaign finance
information?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you support imposing spending limits on state level political campaigns?
A: Yes. King adds, "I hope to increase education funding, subject to revenue limitations."
Source: Maine Governor 1998 National Political Awareness Test
, Nov 1, 1998
Reforms must respect state's rights to select electors.
King adopted the National Governors Association position paper:
The Issue
In the wake of the United States presidential election in Florida, the Congress and the administration has expressed interest in federal standards for elections. Recognizing that Articles I and II of the United States Constitution grants states, not Congress, the authority to determine the manner of selecting presidential electors and conducting elections generally, most legislative proposals do not mandate federal standards. Rather, current proposals direct federal agencies or commissions to study and make recommendations concerning the election system. Nonetheless, the possibility of legislation in the 107th Congress requiring states to implement federal election standards remains. If enacted without adequate funding by the federal government, such legislation could also result in an unfunded mandate to the states.
NGA’s Position
Articles I and II of the United States Constitution grant states the authority to determine the manner of selecting presidential electors and provide that states are responsible for establishing election procedures generally. However, in the wake of the 2000 presidential election, the nation’s Governors recognize the need for election reform. NGA will continue to monitor federal legislation addressing this issue, but has not taken a position in support of or opposition to election reform efforts.
Source: National Governors Association "Issues / Positions" 01-NGA11 on Aug 1, 2001
Matching fund for small donors, with debate requirements.
King signed Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act
Congressional Summary:Fair Elections Now Act--Amends 1971 FECA with respect to:
- 500% matching payments to candidates for certain small dollar contributions;
- a public debate requirement;
- establishment of the Fair Elections Fund and of a Fair Elections Oversight Board;
- remission to the Fair Elections Fund of unspent funds after an election civil penalties for violation of contribution and expenditure requirements;
- Requires all designations, statements, and reports required to be filed under FECA to be filed directly with the FEC in electronic form accessible by computers.
Statement of support for corresponding Senate bill: (Sunlight Foundation) Now we bring you the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, a bill that should probably be the least controversial of all. S. 375 would simply require senators and Senate candidates to file their public campaign finance disclosure reports electronically with the Federal Election Commission,
the way House candidates and presidential candidates have been filing for over a decade. A version of the bill has been introduced during every congress starting in 2003 (!) yet it has been blocked repeatedly, a victim of political football.
Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., has introduced the most recent version, which would ensure that paper Senate campaign finance reports are a thing of the past. But even with 50 bipartisan cosponsors, the bill faces an uphill battle. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, has repeatedly prevented the bill from coming to the Senate floor. We won't be deterred--as long as McConnell continues to block the bill, we'll continue to highlight that his intransigence results in delayed disclosure of vital, public campaign finance information, not to mention wasting $500,000 in taxpayer money annually. Eventually, we'll win.
Source: S375/H.R.269 14_S375 on Feb 25, 2013
Public financing of federal campaigns by voter vouchers.
King co-sponsored H.R.20 & S.366
Congressional Summary:<
- Allow a refundable tax credit of 50% of cash contributions to congressional House campaigns, to be known as "My Voice Federal" contributions.
- Select three states to operate a voucher pilot program.
- Provide, upon request, a "My Voice Voucher" worth $50.
- Authorizes the individual to submit the My Voice Voucher to qualified federal election candidates, allocating a portion of its value in $5 increments.
- Permits an individual to revoke a My Voice Voucher within two days after submitting it to a candidate.
- Establishes the Freedom From Influence Fund in the Treasury [for 6-to-1 matching funds for the vouchers].
- Allows taxpayers to designate overpayments of tax for contribution to the Freedom From Influence Fund.
Supporters reasons for voting YEA:Rep. Sarbanes: Big money warps Congress' priorities and erodes the public's trust in government. This bold new legislation returns voice and power back to
the American people:
- Empower everyday citizens to fuel Congressional campaigns by providing a My Voice Tax Credit.
- Amplify the voices of everyday Americans through a 6-to-1 match.
- Prevent Super PACs from drowning out small donor-backed candidates.
Opponents reasons for voting NAY:(Bill Moyers, Feb. 19, 2015): This citizen engagement strategy, particularly when used to court small donors, is not without its critics. Small donors, at least in the current system, often tend to be political ideologues. That trend leaves many asking: won't moving to small donors just empower extremists? Sarbanes counters, if Congress changes the political fundraising rules, they will also change the calculus for "the rational small donor who right now isn't going to give $25 because they've figured out that it's not going to matter." The prospect of a 6-to-1 match might very well impact how those less ideologically extreme potential donors think about political giving.
Source: Government By the People Act 15_S366 on Feb 4, 2015
Page last updated: Sep 18, 2018