New York City Campaign Finance Board Executive Director Amy Loprest issued the following statement today in reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in McComish v. Bennett:
The Campaign Finance Board needs to study the decision to review its impact, if any, on the city’s landmark campaign finance program.
It is important to note that the law that was overturned by the Court differs significantly from New York City’s Campaign Finance law.
Arizona’s law is a clean elections program that awards public funds grants to candidates to finance their entire campaign. New York City’s program is a matching funds program in which candidates can have their small contributions from New Yorkers matched with public dollars.
The provision of the Arizona law at issue granted participating candidates additional funds if a privately financed candidate’s expenditures, combined with any expenditures by independent actors, exceeded a certain amount. The participating candidate then would receive one dollar for every dollar raised or spent by the privately financed candidate or independent actors, up to a maximum of two times the initial grant of public funding to the participating candidate.
New York City’s law does not contain a dollar for dollar match for participating candidates facing high-spending non-participating candidates. Instead, it increases the matching rate, increases the maximum public funds for which a participant may be eligible, and increases or lifts entirely the spending limit. Additional payments to participating candidates who face high-spending privately funded opponents are based on the participating candidate’s small contributions from New York City residents. Additionally, the activity of independent actors in New York City has no effect on the amount of public funds given to a participating candidate.
As it has for more than 20 years, New York City’s public matching funds program provides small donors with a voice to counterbalance the impact of special interest spending.