Campaign Finance Reform was the topic of the Library’s 1997 Maine Town Meeting, where Tom Andrews, former member of the US House of Representatives and current National Program Director for Citizen Action, addressed a group of concerned citizens on this very important national issue. Andrews opened his remarks by quoting James Madison, who asked: “Who are the electors of the federal representatives? Not the rich more than the poor; not the learned more than the ignorant; not the haughty heirs of distinguished names more than the humble sons of obscure and propitious fortune. The electors are the Great Body of the People of the United States.” Andrews continued, “We are here today because many, if not all of us, are worried that the great body that James Madison referred to, the voice of the people is being obscured, overwhelmed and progressively omitted from the public policy making process. We are worried that our country is steadily moving away from the idea that the people rule, to the reality that big, special-interest-driven money rules.” “No money, no media, no message, no chance” is the theory Andrews feels dominates the political arena today.

With such thought-provoking comments to consider, participants were charged with the following questions: To what extent is the present situation related to changes in media roles in campaigns? To what extent is the current system a product of spending practices? To what extent is it a product of a decline in the roles of political parties as instruments of political action? To what extent are causes so intertwined that it is difficult to determine cause and effect? What happens if the courts uphold the Maine Clean Elections initiative? What happens if courts nullify it?

Panel responses generated the following recommendations: 1. adopting the Maine Clean Elections Act on the national level; 2. educating citizens on the advantages of running for office; 3. surveying current Maine legislators to see if they would have used the campaign finance option if it had been available when they ran; 4. increasing involvement at the grass roots level (voter turn-out, candidate participation, citizens talking about politics in a positive fashion with neighbors and friends); 5. enhancing the connotation of “politics” to voters, 6. providing more detail on campaign expenditures and fund-raising to the public in a timely manner and in ways that are clearer and can be monitored and enforced; 7. financing elections entirely with public funds in order to separate money from decision making; 8. leveling the playing field by reducing the advantage of incumbency; 9. reducing the time legislators have to spend on fund-raising activities, thereby increasing the time they can spend on policy making; 10. eliminating PAC’s; 11. making free time available on radio and television to all qualified candidates; 12. limiting individual contribution levels; and 13. empowering and engaging more people to participate in the political process. Other suggestions included: controlling soft money and practices such as bundling; banning lobbying while Congress is in session; strengthening the FEC; prohibiting the transfer of funds from one candidate to another and the personal use of campaign funds; and limiting financial support from state party committees.