Nurse’s Union - A Shameful and Blatant Political Power Grab

Nurses Propose Donor Limits
Today in the L.A. Times Dan Morain writes about an effort by the California Nurse’s Association (a labor union) to qualify a ballot initiative to radically change California’s campaign finance system. According to the story the nurse’s union will seek to prohibit corporate donations and establish public financing for candidates seeking office. Assembly candidates who opt for public financing will receive $250,000 for their party primary and an additional $400,000 for the general election. People running for Governor would receive $10 million and $15 million respectively. Here’s the kicker, since corporations will be banned from donating directly to candidates, nurses have decided to keep them “in the system” by paying for the public financing through higher corporate income tax rates. Evidently, the nurse’s union will allow candidates to donate as much of their own personal wealth as they want for their own campaign - how convenient since they would be Constitutionally prohibited from preventing it.

Need a Job? Run for Office.
The idea of public financing of campaigns is repugnant at cannot work. If a candidate qualifies for $250,000 in a party primary and $400,000 in a general election for an Assembly race there will surely be hundreds of candidates filing for each seat. How would taxpayers feel about financing candidates from bizarre political parties, or dozens of independents (DTS) in the general election? A general election for an Assembly seat could regularly cost taxpayers over $3.2 million ($400,000 x Republican, Democrat, American Independent, Libertarian, Green, Reform, and throw in a couple of independents for good measure). And remember, every two years all 80 Assembly candidates must run for election - that would total a mere $256 million on just the Assembly races. How about $15 million for Gary Coleman when he files again to be our Governor? Or worst, porn star Mary Carey? Just for fun, I think I might run for the Assembly and just like Representative Bob Filner, hire my wife as my campaign consultant. We could bilk the taxpayers for at least $250,000 and pocket the bulk of it. Or, what the heck, renounce my political party and we could jump right into the general election for a cool $400,000 - I think we could survive on $200,000 a year. How could you stop me? It would be unconstitutional to fund one candidate and not another if they both meet the qualifications to seek public office.

Donation Limits - Only the Rich Need Apply
Severely limiting the amount an individual or organization can contribute to a candidate diminishes the ability of the “common” person to seek public office. Under the U.S. Constitution it is impossible to limit an individual from spending as much as he wants on his own election. The only equalizer for those who are not personally wealthy is the ability to raise money through donations. The more severe the limit on individual donations, the harder it is to level the financial playing field.

A Better Solution
As long as government has an unfathomable role in regulating the market place - picking business "winners and losers" and promoting the cause of private and public employee unions oodles of money will flow into campaign coffers; no matter how the state attempts to limit that money. The only way to reduce spending on campaigns is to severly reduce the scope of government which would then remove the incentive to invest in elections. Since that won't happen and heaps of money will continue to be spent influencing elections, the best thing to do is to create transparency in our campaign finance system; eliminate limits on contribution levels and provide for full and immediate disclosure of donations. Voters would know who is financing a candidate's campaign and opponents could make an issue of it if a candidate is being "bought" by a particular special interest.

The California Nurse's Association Should Be Ashamed
This initiative is a blatant power grab and vendetta by the nurse’s union. Their claim that they are trying to cure a corrupt political system by prohibiting corporate donations to campaigns and initiatives, while allowing labor unions to donate to candidates (with limits) and initiatives does not pass the giggle test.