Letter: Will all wrong about reform

Tuesday, March 12, 2002 | 8:52 a.m.

I strongly disagree with George Will's Feb. 21 column on campaign finance reform. He stated that publicly financed election were "involuntary," and that Arizona's funding mechanisms were "coercive." He's got it all wrong.

First, campaign finance reform is not "involuntary." According to Clean Money Digest, "(the fact that) many more candidates, indeed gubernatorial candidates in Arizona, are choosing to run under Clean Elections in 2002 speaks to the strength of the new system." If the system were "involuntary," as was stated by Will, then all candidates would run as Clean Money Candidates.

Next, "coercive" is the wrong adjective describing Arizona's funding mechanisms. With reference to the 10 percent surcharge on civil and criminal fines -- in Lavis vs. Bayless (2001), the Maricopa County Superior Court held that "the Clean Elections Act does not compel speech to support a specific viewpoint or ideology."

In sum, Clean Elections does not dispel every complication in financing political races, but it is a big step in the right direction. It has also taken a "step" across partisan lines. For example, candidate Mark Spitzer, R-Ariz., believes "Clean Elections empowers the constituency, gives voices to thousands of voters, expands opportunities, and enhances democracy," and Arizona Democrat Ken Cheuvront concedes that legislative decisions shouldn't be made "on the influence of special interest contributions."

JERMAINE LLOYD