Chvala plays chicken with McCallum over campaign reform bill
RICHARD P. JONES
Chvala plays chicken with McCallum over campaign reform bill
By RICHARD P. JONES
of the Journal Sentinel staff
Wednesday, January 30, 2002
Madison — The state Senate on Tuesday stopped short of passing a campaign-finance bill that reform advocates called a model for the nation, delaying a final vote until the governor takes a stand on the measure.
A final vote, which would send it to the Assembly, depends on who blinks first: Republican Gov. Scott McCallum, or Senate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala (D-Madison), who has demanded a promise of full support
Ellis and reform advocates said no other state has done what Wisconsin’s Legislature could do.
But after the Senate dealt with all amendments and came to a final vote, Chvala set the bill aside, holding firm on his demand that McCallum take a stand.
In a letter to Chvala and Ellis, McCallum reserved the right to use his item veto powers and strike certain provisions, if necessary,
McCallum promised to consult with legislative leaders before any veto. But that was not the answer Chvala wanted.
The bill would set new spending limits, increase public funding to candidates who abide by them and provide extra cash when their opponents exceed the spending limits or special interest groups run attack ads against them.
Under the bill amended in the Senate, a Senate candidate accepting public money, for example, could spend no more than $100,000 on his race. With the current limit, $34,500, and grants so low, and so much at stake, spending in key Senate races has approached $2 million.
When Republican Sheila Harsdorf of River Falls upset Sen. Alice Clausing (D-Menomonie) in a crucial Senate race two years ago, spending by the two candidates and special-interest groups totaled $1.7 million. Harsdorf spent a record $409,279; Clausing, $303,051.
The Ellis bill would provide public grants equal to 45% of the spending limit, $100,000 in the Senate and $50,000 in the Assembly. The new spending limit for candidate in the governor’s race would be $2 million. A candidate for attorney general who accepts public money could spend no more than $700,000.
Ellis estimated the cost at $3.5 million, but argued it was tax money well spent in curbing the influence of special interests. To help fund the grants, the campaign check-off on state income tax returns would be increased
Copyright 2002 Journal Sentinel Inc. Note: This notice does not
apply to those news items already copyrighted and received through
wire services or other media
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.