The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set newsroom policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
Michael Cianchette is a Navy reservist who served in Afghanistan. He is in-house counsel to a number of businesses in southern Maine and was a chief counsel to former Gov. Paul LePage.
Bad salesmen abound, particularly in politics.
Of course, that raises a different question: what makes a bad salesman? I’d suggest a bad salesman promises you the moon and sky to get you to buy their product, even if it won’t actually work as advertised. The same holds true with political campaigns.
Seven Novembers ago, Mainers faced a Question 1 surrounding the so-called “clean elections” program. Let’s get into our time machine and see what they were selling.
“When big-money donors spend in political campaigns, they create a feedback loop in public policy that further advances their own interests, deepening the political and economic chasm between themselves and ordinary people.” That was from the League of Women Voters.
U.S. Sen. Angus King decreed that passing Question 1 would “encourage strict campaign spending and contribution limits by strengthening the state’s landmark Clean Elections system so that candidates throughout Maine can run for office without being reliant on special interests and big money donors.”
Meanwhile, the left-leaning Maine Center for Economic Policy — an ally of the Maine People’s Alliance — advocated for Question 1 by arguing “until we limit the influence of big money on our representatives and increase transparency in Maine elections, special interests will continue to block progress on issues that impact Mainers throughout this state.”
Back to today.
The race for the state Senate in the Crown of Maine will likely see more than a $1 million spent trying to influence voters. While the numbers are changing daily, Democrats and their allies are outspending GOP-aligned groups nearly 4-to-1.
Feeling particularly clean?
Both Democrat Troy Jackson and Republican Sue Bernard are “clean election” candidates. They have each received nearly $70,000 in taxpayer funds to finance their campaigns. And, legally, they cannot coordinate with outside groups on any dollars spent to support their electoral efforts.
But Maine Strong — one of the big spenders in support of Jackson — was created at the end of September. They had no money on hand as of Oct. 1. Yet from that zero dollar opening balance, they had managed to spend nearly $250,000 in support of Democrats through Thursday. The principal officer of the PAC is a former legislative aide for the Maine Senate Democrats.
Where did that money come from? We don’t know yet.
If you are looking for something to do, you can thumb through Maine’s campaign finance reports. There are almost certainly similar examples on the GOP side. But that is the point.
For all the sales pitches around “clean elections,” we are watching undisclosed big money donors flood into Aroostook County’s media markets to try to keep Benard from winning. When the dust settles, I’d be willing to wager we find that big money came from groups politically aligned with supporters of 2015’s Question 1.
Republicans are not a monolith when it comes to the clean elections program. Some strongly advocate for it. Others use it begrudgingly to try and keep a level playing field. Still more oppose it altogether, believing those tax dollars would be better spent on more important needs.
So far this year, more than $3.5 million has been given from the state treasury to political campaigns. Is there anything else in the state budget more worthy of those millions?
The Mills-LePage and Poliquin-Golden battles are soaking up all the headlines statewide. But the battle for control of the Maine Legislature is much more likely to be decided by any particular voter.
So see what your local candidate is selling. Raise an eyebrow if it sounds too good to be true. And if you are in northern Aroostook, sorry Question 1 didn’t fix the million-dollar advertising onslaught.