We need campaign finance reform and redistricting, and that will be just a start.

Campaign finance proposals would get NY closer to other states

ALBANY, N.Y. — Proposals to reform campaign finance laws, which good-government groups consider the key to changing Albany’s pay-for-play image, would bring New York closer to most other states that prohibit large contributions.

The issue is the prime focus in Albany this week in what the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle recently editorialized “may be the best chance in a generation to break the lock special interests and big money have on the electoral process.” So far publicly, the result has been intransigence and name calling by all sides with nine weeks left in the regular legislative session.

“Campaign finance reform matters because 99 percent of New Yorkers do not give a dime directly to NY candidates, so if money talks, regular people do not get heard on issues they care about,” said Rachel Leon of Common Cause-New York. “A small elite gives a ton and dominates debate and sets priorities on issues like health care, the environment and more.”

Because federal election limits are lower, a New Yorker can contribute more to a candidate for the state Legislature than for president, she said.

For example, New York has the highest limit for an individual’s contribution _ $55,900 to candidates facing a primary and a general election _ and no limits for political action committees, although other states do, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

New York has no limit on contributions to parties for “housekeeping” accounts. And while corporations are limited to $5,000 contributions, they can form limited liability corporations and spend as if they were individuals. Unions may also spend up to $55,000.

In New York, a corporation can also provide the maximum $5,000 contribution through each of its subsidiaries.

By contrast, California limits contributions to a candidate to $25,000 from any individual or corporation or labor union; Massachusetts has a $5,000 limit for individuals while corporate contributions are prohibited and unions are restricted to $15,000 a year; New Jersey has a $25,000 limit for individuals, corporations and unions.

Spitzer wants to ban contributions from limited liability corporations and set limits no higher than his self-imposed limits of $10,000 to his campaign committee. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver favors Spitzer’s plan.

Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno said Spitzer’s plan would favor wealthy politicians and fail to regulate contributions to parties by so-called 527 groups _ such as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that played a role in the last presidential campaign _ that are not subject to conventional campaign finance rules.

As for New York’s loose restrictions compared to other states, Bruno said: “I don’t think that’s important.”

“Don’t shackle people from expressing themselves,” Bruno said. “If anybody thinks that people are influenced by $1,000, $10,000, or a $50,000 contribution then they are wrong. They are just plain wrong.”

Then Bruno criticized Spitzer, a millionaire through Manhattan real estate holdings, of trying to cut off donations that he doesn’t need. Spitzer doesn’t propose to limit self-financing of campaigns.

“It’s kind of hard for him sometimes to relate to the average person,” Bruno said in the latest dig at the Democrat. “He, himself, has the ability to write checks by the millions of dollars. He can call a friend who can raise $100,000 at a time … We have to do it the hard way.”