Public financing backers scramble to save NC plan

The Dispatch: Public Financing Under Threat

By Gary D. Robertson
The Associated Press
© May 5, 2013
RALEIGH, N.C.

North Carolina’s milestone public financing program for appellate court candidates — already bruised by court rulings and third-party campaign spending — is in danger of being killed off this year in the name of fiscal responsibility and limited government.

At least three bills filed by Republicans at the General Assembly and Gov. Pat McCrory’s budget proposal would do away with the program, which has been widely used by Court of Appeals and Supreme Court candidates since it became available in 2004.

The state gives candidates money for their general election campaigns if they agree to restrictions on fundraising, which judges routinely say is one of their most unpleasant duties. The voluntary program, the first of its kind in the country when approved, was designed to reduce the perception that judges and their rulings could be influenced by donors, namely attorneys and interest groups.

All eight candidates in the four officially nonpartisan statewide judicial races on last November’s ballot participated in the program.

“It has had such a great success story to date,” said Bob Phillips, executive director of Common Cause North Carolina, one of several statewide and national advocacy groups now attempting to save the program.

Many GOP legislators disagree with Phillips’ assessment. Government shouldn’t be involved in funding political campaigns, they argue, and the money received — $240,100 for each Supreme Court candidate and $164,400 for Court of Appeals candidates — isn’t near what’s needed to run a robust statewide general election campaign.

“The program as set up really isn’t all that effective at solving the issue of who their judges are and who their judicial candidates are,” said Sen. Pete Brunstetter, R-Forsyth and co-chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. He said the chamber’s version of the budget released this month is expected to include the repeal. Providing the money necessary to give these and other candidates broad exposure to voters, he added, “just breaks the bank.”