HOW WE SEE IT: Campaign Financing Made Easy

When is a campaign donation not a campaign donation? When it’s a ticket to a fundraiser, of course.

That’s the simple explanation of how money given to one state legislative candidate

ends up in the coffers of another one altogether, even though state law prohibits such campaigns from contributing to each other. NWA Media reported last week a number

of state legislative candidates from both parties used some of their campaign war

chests to help other candidates, even though direct contributions from one to another is forbidden. The money changed hands legally when candidates bought tickets to other candidates’ fundraising events.

“The presumption is that you’re not buying the ticket to support that candidate, but instead buying access to the crowd at that event,” Graham Sloan, director of the Arkansas Ethics Commission, told a curious reporter.

In the Byzantine world of political campaign contributions, that actually makes a little bit of sense.

Any candidate, even one who happens to be unopposed at the moment, can find value in mingling with like-minded and politically active individuals. So a Republican purchasing tickets to another Republican’s fundraiser, for example, provides the candidate a chance to rub elbows, shake hands, network, etc. Democrats, of course, do it too, as the newspaper story points out.

Given that context, using campaign money to purchase a ticket for the candidate and a spouse or aide to another’s fundraising event doesn’t raise too many red fl ags.

We do believe, however, there ought to be a limit.

State senator-elect Uvalde Lindsey, a Democrat from Fayetteville, made this point: “Tickets to fundraisers, paid by your campaign, is fine, although instances where a campaign buys two or three thousand dollars worth of tickets ... is really stretching the ticketing somewhat.”

Reporters didn’t find any of those instances this time around. But it’s something both the legislature and the state ethics commission should deal with.

Two to four tickets purchased with campaign money for someone else’s fundraiser sounds about right. More than that makes following the money problematic. And following the money is the whole point.

The idea behind insisting candidates report their campaign contributions is so that the public can evaluate the level of influence any one person or organization may have. Voters ought to be able to judge for themselves if money buys access. When candidates start swapping lots of money among themselves, the waters get muddy and the money trail gets lost. Plus, donors ought to know if their money is going for the candidate they chose to support or to someone else.

Clarity should be the rule of the day. A donor’s money ought to go directly to the candidates he or she supports, not funneled through someone else’s campaign.

Opinion, Pages 5 on 11/14/2012

Upcoming Events