Doyle Exceeds Early Thompson's $$$

From The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign:

For the second straight reporting period, Governor Jim Doyle raised more than twice as much campaign money as did former Governor Tommy Thompson - the most prolific campaign fundraiser in Wisconsin history - in comparable years during Thompson's four terms in office.

Governor Doyle's handlers said his fundraising prowess proves the state's residents support his agenda during his first 18 months in office.

Actually, the governor's donors represent just a fraction of 1 percent of Wisconsin residents. If Doyle's people are right and campaign contributions are an accurate measure of popular support, then well over 99 percent of the people of the state don't support the governor.

The Doyle camp's claim is hardly the first time campaign fundraising has been held up as evidence of widespread public approval of a political agenda. Three years ago this month former Governor Scott McCallum's campaign touted record-breaking donations, and a McCallum campaign spokesperson said the fundraising success made it "clear that Wisconsin residents believe Governor McCallum is a wonderful governor."

In truth, politicians' campaign fundraising shows only that they are in good with the political class. If it says anything about how the general public feels, it speaks to broad citizen alienation from the democratic process.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Common Cause in Wisconsin this week pointed out further evidence that the epidemic of uncontested state legislative races is due for the most part to Wisconsin's broken campaign finance system when it compared electoral competitiveness and voter turnout in Wisconsin and neighboring Minnesota.

In 2002, Minnesota led the nation in voter turnout when 61 percent of its eligible voters went to the polls. Wisconsin, which for many years was second only to Minnesota in turnout, fell to 14th when just 45 percent of the state's eligible voters cast a ballot.

A key difference between the two states is the competitiveness of statehouse races. Common Cause found that only eight races for seats in Minnesota's 134-seat House of Representatives are uncontested this year, while Wisconsin has more than four times that many uncontested races for its smaller, 99-seat state Assembly.

Why the competitiveness gap? Common Cause reports that in 2002, every candidate for the Minnesota Legislature agreed to spending limits and accepted public financing grants equal to half of the spending limit. So all candidates competed on a level playing field.

Contrast that with the grotesque fundraising advantages winning legislative candidates in Wisconsin enjoyed in 2002. Most legislative candidates here have abandoned the state's antiquated public financing system and because they refuse to accept the public grants they are not bound by the law's spending limits.

The irony is that Minnesota modeled its campaign financing system after the law adopted in Wisconsin in the late 1970s. But Minnesota has continued to upgrade and adapt its system to changing times, while Wisconsin's has been allowed to fall apart.