Commentary—

Forget The Governor — It’s The System

By William A. Collins

Crooked leaders,

Still the norm;

’Til we get,

Campaign reform.

The overwhelming question on the lips of state politicians and journalists these days is, “When will the governor resign?” To which the proper response is, “Who cares?” The important question we should be asking is, “When will we cure the system that created him?”

Unfortunately the legislative groundswell to fix the system is puny compared with the tidal wave of fervor to oust the guv. That’s because the legislators who would have to change the law have a pretty good thing going themselves. And it’s bipartisan. Regardless of party, incumbents — leaders especially — have much greater access to big donors than do challengers, so why would any politicians in their right minds want to throw away that advantage?

Answer? They don’t. They like things just fine the way they are, thanks. They’ve each developed their own set of political action committees (PACs) and friendly business donors. These, in turn, enjoy a special relationship when it comes time to consider relevant legislation or to award contracts. Fortunately, some legislators do take a longer view. They see that government will never be clean as long as major money interests can dominate campaigns.

The recognized remedy for such big private money is big government money. America has long been using this remedy to good effect in presidential campaigns. And now Arizona and Maine are using it to good effect in state campaigns. Indeed, Arizona’s current governor, and much of its legislature, won election with taxpayer funding. Good government runneth over. Special interests there have been banished to the desert. At least for the moment.

In order to reach this heavenly state, of course, Arizona had to suffer through two indicted governors. So far, Connecticut doesn’t even have one, though that may change. Nonetheless, the moment for reform here seems ripe. But time is running short. The legislative session ends in early May, and the reform crusade still has miles to go before it sleeps. Neither House nor Senate leaders show enthusiasm, and the press seems oblivious.

The press, remember, also has a conflict of interest. Many of those big donations under the current corrupt system get spent on advertising, increasing the profits of you-know-who. This helps explain why editorials and reporters are assigned ad nauseum to detail the governor’s misdeeds, but political reform might as well be happening in Baluchistan.

But luckily reform is not rocket science. Credible candidates would simply be offered government money for their campaigns if they agreed to strict spending limits. PACs would be outlawed too. In order to qualify as “credible,” a candidate would have to begin the election year by reaching a certain threshold of bucks from small donors, a requirement that no one has yet found offensive.

A few years ago, members of the General Assembly amazingly did pass a bill like that, only to have the governor veto it. Indeed, they may have passed it because they knew he would veto it. But this year, it’s different. The governor might just feel that he could rescue some tiny shred of legacy by signing such a bill. That gives some lawmakers pause. They’re not so sure they want to pass it if it might actually become law.

Meanwhile New Haven, often a leader in public policy, is busily preparing a reform ordinance for itself. Of course it needs authorization from the legislature, but that may well be forthcoming. It’s always less painful to reform others than oneself. Meanwhile my own family gives a few shekels to a PAC for an upcoming leader whom we like. Still got to play by the existing rules, you know.

(Columnist William A. Collins is a former state representative and a former mayor of Norwalk.)