Contribution & Spending Limits

Enact campaign contribution and spending limits where constitutionally possible

Where not, combine voluntary contribution and spending limits with various forms of public financing.

– Allow all candidates that accept voluntary spending limits to have full candidate statements in the electronic versions of state and county voter guides at minimal cost; and for the hard copy versions, at a greatly reduced cost than current practice.

– Allow all candidates that accept voluntary spending limits to receive equal free time on the public broadcast spectrum, in governmental voter guides and on the California Channel, and via other public mediums.

– Allow candidates that accept voluntary spending limits to earn matching funds to funds raised from small donations, and to earn additional matching funds to respond to late-campaign political action committees and independent expenditures.

– Amend the U.S. Constitution to unequivocally define that money is not speech; that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights; and that full regulation or limitation of campaign contributions and spending be allowed. Such an amendment would overturn Citizens United v. FEC (2010), McCutcheon v. FEC (2014) and Buckley v. Vallejo (1976).

There is a problem w/high fees for candidate ballot statements - California’s existing system of campaign finance regulation includes (a) limits on campaign contributions and (b) voluntary campaign expenditure limits for state candidates.

Statewide candidates who accept the voluntary expenditure limits are designated as having done so in the state Voter Information Guide (and legislative candidates in the voter information portion of county sample ballots). Participating candidates may also purchase space to place a 250-word statement in these publications.

The problem is that the price for these statements is set so high as to prevent many candidates from being able to afford more than a small number of words. This penalizes voters by denying them basic information about the choices before them, favors big money within the public information infrastructure and provides a disincentive for candidates to accept voluntary spending limits.

I would reverse this practice and ensure that an equal baseline of information about all ballot-qualified candidates is available to voters.

Your vote for Michael Feinstein for Secretary of State is a vote for a Democracy Bill of Rights for California