Vote “No” on Shameful Bill that Does Huge Damage to New York’s Historic Small Donor Matching Law

June 7, 2023
Leave the small donor law intact and in effect for the 2024 election cycle
 

We urge the Legislature to vote NO on A7760/S7564. This shameful bill inflicts huge damage on New York’s historic small donor matching law and is completely counter to the law’s goal of giving the average New Yorker a stronger voice in our democracy.

Big donors have dominated New York State elections for decades, fostering a culture of pay-to-play and a parade of state elected leaders leaving office after betraying the public trust. 

New York State’s 2019 small donor matching law is far from perfect – compared to the New York City public campaign finance system, it is far too lax. But it is a big step in the right direction, was thoroughly debated in public at well-attended hearings, and was exhaustively discussed by the Legislature. This bill makes huge changes to the program at the very end of session, without sufficient time for the public to fully understand them.

We join the editorial boards of the Daily News and Buffalo News and the dozens of groups in the Fair Elections for New York Coalition in urging the Legislature to leave the small donor law intact and in effect for the 2024 election cycle as planned. 

Here is our summary of the most destructive changes this bill will inflict on New York’s long-awaited public small donor matching law:

  1. Removes the $250 cap on matchable donations, so that the first $250 of donation(s) of any size up to the maximum are matched with public funds. 

    This is a huge step backwards. Current state law says if you give more than $250 in total contributions in one election cycle, you get no public match – zero. If this destructive bill passes, the CEO of a company with state contracts could make a $10,000 campaign contribution to a State Senator and the public would provide another $2,300 in matching funds. 

    The $250 cap was highly debated in 2019 and agreed to as a political compromise in which public match advocates grudgingly accepted the Legislature’s proposal for much higher contribution limits than under the NYC law. 
     
  2. Raises the number of in-district donors and the total donation amount needed to qualify for matching funds far above the current law. This would make it much harder for opponents to qualify for the public match, resulting in significantly less competitive elections. To qualify for the program, Assembly candidates will need to raise $10,000 from 145 in-district residents, up from $6,000 from 75 in-district residents. Senate candidates will need to raise $24,000 from 350 in-district residents, up from $12,000 and 150 in-district residents. 

Below and linked is a chart showing what destructive changes are being proposed and comparing the proposed bill to NYS and NYC’s campaign finance laws.

Public Matching Proposal Makes Other Complicated Changes Without Sufficient Time to Vet Them

The bill adds a large number of other changes that will take time to unpack and understand how they will affect the efficacy of the program with only days remaining in the legislative session:

  • Having unspent public funds from the primary election reduces the amount of public funds candidates can receive in the general election.
  • Clarifies that to have their donation matched, donors must live in the candidate’s district at the time of the donation. 
  • Specifies schedule of public fund payment dates:
    • Primary Election – December 15th of year prior to election, and for the election year, January 15th, February 15th, March 15th, April 5th and three additional payments before the Primary;  
    • General Election – July 15th and a minimum of three payments within 90 days of the General Election.
  • Makes candidates ineligible for public funds if they have outstanding fines from the state matching system or other matching systems like the NYC program.
  • Clarifies that primary election participants are not required to participate in the program during the general election.
  • Sets criteria for competitive elections by law instead of allowing the Public Campaign Finance Board to set them by regulation. If the election is not competitive, candidates can only receive one-quarter of the public funds payments. The elections are competitive if at least one of the following conditions are met:
    • Margin of victory for general elections in the last eight years was 20 points or less for the seat
    • Opposing candidate has received endorsement of current or former statewide official, or current or federal elected official representing all or a portion of the district
    • Opposing candidate has received three or more endorsements from other current or former state or local officials representing all or a portion of the district
    • In the past 10 years, the candidate’s spouse, domestic partner or family member held elective office in all or a portion of the district
    • The opposing candidate has received state public matching funds for the covered election
    • An individual is self-funding and has given or loaned themselves $24,000 for Senate or $10,000 for Assembly
    • The opposing candidate previously held elective office
  • Political communications must include a disclosure that the candidate is a “New York State Public Campaign Finance Program Participant.”
  • The PCFB is required to develop and administer a training program for individuals to become certified compliance officers for the program.
  • Unspent funds must be returned only if the amount of qualified campaign expenditures is less than the amount of public funds remaining. A “surplus” must be returned if the surplus is more than the difference between the public matching funds received and the total qualified campaign expenditures.
  • Names of candidates audited by the Public Campaign Finance Board will not be disclosed unless there is a finding of wrongdoing.
  • Severability clause is expanded to the full article (was previously limited to particular subdivisions).