Friday, June 2nd, 2006...6:50 am
Just Because You Take Clean Elections Money…
A response from Gabrielle Giffords to last week’s “Real Democrats for Real Mudslinging” letter hit our mailboxes yesterday. She refutes the same points that I refuted earlier, which will probably lead to more allegations from supporters of other candidates that I am a paid shill for her campaign. I ought to call her and demand a check, I guess.
But, she brings up a point that I neglected in my response: her support of the Clean Elections system. One of the allegations made in the “Real Democrats…” letter was that Giffords refused Clean Elections money in her races for state legislature. Truth to tell, I would have rather she had run as a “Clean” candidate as well. But, she was also someone who was very supportive of the system in the legislature, where she helped fight off attempts to defund and weaken the system.
Why is merely taking the money a show of support?
I ask this because I was involved in the campaign two years ago to fight off an attempt to gut the system. For those who don’t remember, there was an attempt by group of businessmen, including Jim Click, to push an initiative to defund the Clean Elections system. The comedy came when it turned out that the initiative was illegal, and all those millions went down the drain. Brings a tear to the eye, don’t it?
I helped out with a few “house parties” and was in touch with the folks running the campaign down here. One frustration that I had was that some candidates and office holders that took Clean Elections money were nowhere to be found when the time came to defend the system.
Heck, just look at who it is in the legislature that tries to knock the legs out from Clean Elections; it seems to mostly be folks who took Clean Elections money. One of the most prominent of these is Rick Murphy, who hapilly took Clean Elections money when he ran for election, but apparently doesn’t want anyone else to. Interestingly, Murphy’s bill was supported by Judy Burges, Laura Knaperek and Jerry Weiers, who are happily taking Clean Elections money this year. At least Murphy isn’t taking the “corrupt” (his word) money this time.
On the other hand, there were folks like John Loredo, who didn’t take Clean Elections money, but were very supportive and helped the campaign to save the system. Phil Lopes was very supportive as well, even though he was ineligible to participate in Clean Elections due to his lack of an opponent.
I can also point out that Giffords’s opponents never have taken Clean Elections money either. Yes, that would be silly, but no sillier than not looking at what she has actually done to support the system.
10 Comments
June 2nd, 2006 at 12:12 pm
What pisses me off about Gabby’s campaigning in 02 and 04 was that she had the tamarity to show up at the clean elections forums in each the primary and general each time and take a place on the podium.
I thought it was sleazy then and still think so today.
June 2nd, 2006 at 12:42 pm
I seem to recall, when she first ran for office, she initially considered running under clean elections, but opted not to because several of her opponents already indicated they were not running under clean elections, and she felt to be competitive she could not either.
I am pretty sure she’s always favored clean elections _if_ they were mandated — i.e., everyone was limited, no fund-raising allowed.
June 2nd, 2006 at 1:01 pm
George,
This is from section 16-956 A2 of the Clean Elections Act passed by Arizona voters:
“The (Clean Elections) commission shall invite and permit nonparticipating candidates to participate in debates.”
Gabby was invited to participate in each of the Clean Elections debates by law.
June 2nd, 2006 at 3:41 pm
Union Guy, I know the law. I still feel it was sleazy. I can have an opinion, can’t I? Oh yeah, if it doesn’t coincide with what the Gabbots say then it really doesn’t count.
June 3rd, 2006 at 12:55 pm
Anyone who doesn’t participate in clean elections doesn’t support it, plain and simple!
June 3rd, 2006 at 1:06 pm
Thanks for clarifying that boohoo, glad that question has been definitively resolved by an expert!
By the way, what are the Latas and Weiss positions on clean elections? I didn’t see anything on either of their web sites.
June 4th, 2006 at 1:07 pm
Maybe you should go listen to them. They are both campaigning hard for a clean federal elections program.
Glad you pointed out that Miss Giffords wasn’t competitive in her previous election under clean elections. She sure wasn’t when she was a repug and felt she could win in a primary, hence she switched teams.
June 5th, 2006 at 12:05 am
TEDSKI–
Why did Giffords choose to not use Arizona’s Clean Elections public funding in any of her campaigns?
June 6th, 2006 at 12:32 am
cc buro…
She chose not to use clean elections money because she was too busy getting her fundraising base for her opportunistic congressional run she knew was coming. How could she fund raise like she has if she hadn’t spent the last 5 years working a fundraising base? She would have not had as much success fundraising for her congressional run had she not already hit up these same donors in years past for campaign contributions bypassing the clean elections.
June 6th, 2006 at 1:08 am
boohoo,
she switched to the team in the minority in her district. she switched parties because of her positions and values. if it was just about winning she’d be campaigning as a republican. they’re the majority of the electorate.