Loving deep-pocketed political donors means never having to say you’re sorry.
So says Governor Andrew Cuomo, who recently garnered headlines for hosting a secretive fund-raiser in Manhattan that cost contributors $25,000 a couple for an intimate steak dinner with him and the state budget director.
Cuomo has been urging the legislature to adopt a public financing system to help upstart political candidates challenge incumbents and wealthy opponents. But he told WNYC Tuesday that doesn't necessarily mean he wants to scale back campaign checks fatter than almost any in the country.
“If you say to me, for example, the cap on your race is $5 million, and let's say I have a political opponent named Donald Trump who doesn't like me, and he puts together an independent expenditure committee and raises $20 million,” Cuomo said. “Then I’m the former governor of New York.”
Independent Expenditure Committees, commonly referred to as super-PACs, can spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, as long as they’re not coordinated with candidates’ efforts.
Fear of super-PACs is commonly cited as a reason not to limit campaign contributions. New York has among the highest donation limits in the country. Individuals can give more than $275,000 to candidates running statewide. (Though some states have no limit at all.)
In the new budget, Cuomo and lawmakers allocated $100 million for campaign matching funds to amplify small-donor contributions, but they couldn't agree on a system for doling out the donations. So they created a campaign finance commission to study the issue and recommend a solution.
Lawrence Norden, from NYU's Brennan Center for Justice, said public matching funds can provide enough money to candidates focused on small donors to fight back against those backed by large donors – and independent expenditure committees.
“The Citizens United decision said super PACs and others can spend unlimited amounts of money,” Norden said. “So a small-donor public finance system is the only thing we have that can give regular people and small donors a voice.”
Such a system, he said, motivates politicians to spend more time with small donors and less time with big donors and lobbyists — and still end up ahead.
New York City has one of the only public campaign funds in the country. It matches small donations 8-to-1 for candidates running for most offices. Candidates only have to abide by the lower dollar caps if they want matching funds. Otherwise, they can opt out of the system.
“If a candidate is worried about independent expenditures, he doesn’t have to participate,” he said. “But in New York City and Connecticut [which also has a matching system], almost all candidates do, and the reason is simple: the programs are well designed to maximize the chances any candidate can stay competitive while still being focused on small donors.”
What the numerical match would be for political campaigns across New York state would be determined by the new blue-ribbon panel. But its mandate is vague, and it could, theoretically, recommend no matching system at all.
The commission will consist of nine people appointed by Cuomo and the majority and minority leaders of the state senate and assembly.
Its recommendation are due by December 1 and would be binding — unless legislators call a special session within 20 days to amend or reject them.