Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Rein in 527s

Florida's campaign finance laws are meaningless as long as politicians can rake in as much money as they want through their slush funds.

The Florida Legislature took a significant step toward cleaning up Tallahassee last year when it banned lawmakers and statewide elected officials from accepting gifts from lobbyists and their clients and required lobbyists to disclose their fees. Now it should build on that momentum and go after the real scandal: slush funds maintained by dozens of legislators.

The banned steak dinners and open bar tabs were small potatoes compared to the checks of $25,000 or more that lawmakers can pick up from a single special interest and deposit into these accounts. The so-called 527 groups, often organized at the state level as committees of continuous existence, and similar groups have good-government sounding names such as Citizens for a Greater Florida and Floridians for a Better Government. In fact, they are the equivalent of shell companies accepting protection money.

Now a bipartisan group of Republicans and Democrats, including Senate President Tom Lee, are pushing to prohibit lawmakers, statewide officeholders and candidates for those offices from soliciting unlimited amounts of money for such groups. The bill is scheduled to come up in the Senate Judiciary Committee today, and at least lawmakers should extend the $500 contribution limit to individual campaign accounts to these slush funds. House Speaker Allan Bense and other Republican leaders should join the effort - for their own good and for the good of the state.

Campaign finance laws in Florida are meaningless as long as politicians can raise as much as they can from individuals and businesses, then spend it on food, trips and self-promotion. The $500 contribution limit to individual campaigns is intended to limit the influence of any one donor. An argument can be made for increasing that limit, but limiting money flowing directly into campaigns is useless as long as access and influence can be more easily bought through these shadow committees.

The politicians addicted to big money will raise concerns about free speech and defending themselves. But the limit would only apply to legislators, statewide officeholders and candidates for those offices. These accounts have very little to do with speech and everything to do with buying influence, and politicians could still raise money for their own accounts and their political parties. The slush funds pose a very real threat of corruption, and they endanger the integrity of state government.

Why should Sen. Mike Bennett, R-Bradenton, be able to accept a $10,000 check from a real estate company for his Citizens for Housing and Urban Growth, which distributed four $500 checks to Senate candidates and paid a $354 catering bill?

Why should Sen. Lee Constantine, R-Altamonte Springs, be able to accept a $10,000 check from a law firm for his Citizens for a Greater Florida, which paid a $331 bill at Joe's Stone Crab in Miami Beach, covered phone bills and sent flowers to someone at Tampa General Hospital?

There are a number of other important reforms in the Senate bill backed by Lee that are aimed at the committees not controlled by politicians. Electioneering communications organizations would be required to register with the state promptly, electronically report contributions faster and avoid laundering contributions from other tax-exempt groups that don't disclose similar information. That will enable the media and the voters to better determine the identity and the motivations behind the attack ads and fliers that drag political debate into the gutter.

No amount of public reporting can clean up the committees controlled by the politicians in Tallahassee. This isn't about free speech; it's about buying and selling access. Republicans and Democrats can leave a lasting legacy by clamping down on these slush funds now.

[Last modified April 25, 2006, 01:07:12]