Poll Shows Solid Support for Clean Elections
Joe Schneider
A substantial margin of recently polled San Diegans indicated they would support a Clean Elections initiative that would limit the corruptive influence of special interests on local politics.
55% of those surveyed said they would vote in favor of Clean Elections while 37% gave a negative response, said political analyst Larry Remer. 78% said the city would have more efficient government if the program were approved. A total of 400 likely general election voters were interviewed in mid-December by a professional polling firm. The survey was commissioned by Neighborhoods for Clean Elections. “We decided to do a poll to help design a measure that could be supported by San Diego voters,” said John Hartley, coordinator for Neighborhoods for Clean Elections.
"We wanted to craft a ballot measure that could win," Hartley said. The organization is now considering whether to take the issue to the voters this year or in 2008.
Reflecting the troubled times at City Hall, 68% said the influence of special interests is a serious problem. 69% said developers have too much power and 64% felt lobbyists had too much clout. 55% said neighborhoods were getting scant attention from City Hall. “This is clearly a situation where the public feels big money has too much power and they’re willing to adopt the Clean Elections program,” Remer said. “It’s solid public support for Clean Elections that we can build on.”
Pollsters asked citizens whether they would be willing to spend public funds at a time of severe budget deficits. The program would have a cost of $4 to $6 per resident per year. 50% said they would support that amount and 66% said it’s worth $6 a year to reduce the influence of special interest campaign contributions in local government
As tested in the poll, the Clean Elections fund would provide every qualified candidate with 60 cents per resident in the primary and 90 cents per resident in the general election to run their campaigns. That would provide City Council candidates with almost $100,000 for a primary and $150,000 for a runoff. In citywide races, the primary amount would be $720,000 and the runoff $1.2 million. This is substantially less than the winners of the recent elections spent in their race but enough, according to election experts, to enable Clean candidates to get their message out to the voters.
In order to “qualify” as a Clean Candidate, potential office seekers would have to collect 500 signatures and 500 individual contributions from voters in their district. Citywide, the levels would be set at 2000 signatures and contributions. This is a difficult hurdle for candidates to meet and was set as such to prevent marginal candidates without community support from qualifying for public funding. The Ethics Commission would be given broad power to issue regulations and audit campaigns to insure compliance.
