MPR: Money Rules Minnesota Politics

Money Rules Minnesota Politics
by Laura McCallum
January 26, 2000

A report to be released today finds an explosion of special interest money in Minnesota politics over the past few years. The study gives ammunition to campaign finance reform supporters, who argue the 2000 elections are likely to be the most expensive in Minnesota history.

HAMLINE UNIVERSITY professor David Schultz, the former president of Common Cause Minnesota, spent months poring through numbers for his study, and says it will demonstrate the scope of the problem of unregulated money in politics. Among his findings: in 1998, lobbyist and political action committee contributions to the state Republican and DFL parties and House and Senate caucuses totaled nearly $2 million.

Read the Report
See a full copy of the report on the Hamline University Web site.

Schultz: The issue is not individual corruption, it's institutional corruption; how does money overall affect legislative decision-making process? When millions of dollars are being spent on contributions to the parties, to the House and Senate caucuses for each party, this is money that you can't necessarily attribute to your particular representative, but it's clearly money that's influencing the party of your representative, and that party is clearly pressuring your representative to vote in a certain way.

Schultz and other reformers see two big problems with the current system. The first is so-called soft money - contributions to political parties not subject to the same limits as contributions to individual candidates. The other is independent expenditures, which - thanks to a district court ruling last fall - now allow political parties, along with other special interest groups, to spend as much as they like supporting specific candidates or attacking their opponents.

Newly-elected DFL State Senator Tony Kinkel of Park Rapids says because of the ruling, he thinks the total spent by both sides in his December special election approached $250,000 - what might be the most expensive Minnesota legislative race - and he's concerned about the increase of soft money flowing into campaigns.

Kinkel: I think it's poisoning politics and it's a joke. It's a joke how they get around this. The PACs will call up and say - 'cause there's a limit on how much PAC money we can take in our campaign - so they'll say, "Well, if you're PAC'd out, then they just send the money to your county party. And then they can spend it on anything - and the only thing is, they don't have to tell you - all they gotta make sure is - they don't tell me what ad they're doing, but they can put my name in there, or they can put my opponent's name in there." It's a joke.

The report compiled by Schultz looks at some of the top industries spending money to influence Minnesota politics, such as health care, gambling and real estate. But Brian McClung, who directs Republican Senate campaigns, says there's nothing wrong with industries that have a stake in the political process contributing to campaigns. McClung says voters usually say in polls that they think there's too much money in politics, but the alternative is a less-informed electorate.

McClung: Sometimes the principled stand is not always the popular stand, especially when somebody can run around with a sound bite saying that money is evil and we have to take the money out of politics. But maybe the principled stand is to say, "We have to protect people's free speech rights." And if a group or organization or political party wants to say something about a political campaign, we have to protect their right to say that.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that states don't violate free speech rights when they limit individual contributions to campaigns, a move applauded by campaign finance reformers. DFL State Representative Matt Entenza of St. Paul says the ruling makes it clear that states can set reasonable spending limits, and he plans to introduce legislation this session restricting independent expenditures by political parties. It's the same idea that was rejected by a federal judge last fall, but Entenza says his bill should pass constitutional muster because it's modeled after a Maine law that courts have upheld. It raises the independent expenditure limit to ten times the cap on individual contributions.

"You could literally see the airwaves saturated on a state House race and we've never seen that before, and literally, races bought and sold off of a few checks. "

- Matt Entenza

Entenza says without limits, races will be up for sale for special-interest groups and parties.

Entenza: Now I think we could see anywhere from $100,000 to $500,00 of party money being spent in these seats - in Mankato, in Duluth, in Moorhead, you could literally see the airwaves saturated on a state House race and we've never seen that before, and literally, races bought and sold off of a few checks.

Entenza admits his bill will be a tough sell at the Capitol. Both DFL Senate Majority Leader Roger Moe and Republican House Speaker Steve Sviggum say they're concerned about the soft money explosion in campaigns, but unless both parties can agree on spending limits, the legislation's prospects look slim.

Among the groups likely to oppose Entenza's bill is Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life. Executive director Jackie Schwietz says the MCCL supports the rights of political parties and special interest groups to express their views through campaign spending, and any restrictions are a slippery slope.

Schweitz: When I talk to candidates sometimes, they sometimes support limits because they've been "the victim" of some issue group running ads against them. And what I try and remind them all the time is that we don't always like what people say about us, but people do have a right of free speech, as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's right. And we support the rights of even Planned Parenthood and the abortion rights people to speak out because once somebody's rights are taken away, the rest will follow.

Schwietz says the MCCL will probably spend more money on election 2000 than on other recent campaigns, because all 201 legislative seats are at stake.

Campaign finance reform advocates say the soft money certain to flow into campaigns this year will probably lead to a flurry of negative ads, which the public may reject. And reformers do have a cheerleader in Governor Ventura, who has railed against special interest money in politics, and refuses to take lobbyist or PAC contributions. The governor has not made campaign finance reform a top legislative priority, but advocates are still hoping he will.

	Sign up to receive e-mail newsletters

	Audio help

	Text: Sm : Md : Lg