slides: Oregon Candidates and Their Biggest Donors

Monday, November 03, 2014

GoLocalPDX News Team

Oregon is one of only five states in the country with no limits on campaign contributions and it’s reflective in the hundreds of thousands of dollars that poured into statewide candidates' pockets this election cycle.

As voters complete their ballots by Election Day on Nov. 4, they might want to take note of who gave candidates the most money and who might have their ear if they’re elected. From Nike Chairman Phil Knight’s $250,000 donation to Gov. John Kitzhaber to a $33,000 individual contribution for state senate candidate Dave Dotterer, it’s clear big money is a player this election season.

“It (limitless campaign contributions) creates a breeding ground for corruption,” said Daniel Weiner, counsel in the democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law. “The pressure is going to be enormous when they later come calling for favors.”

Oregon is one of just five states - Missouri, Utah and Virginia and Nebraska - with no limits on how much an individual, political action committee or corporation can donate to a candidate.

“It can skew candidates’ perspectives,” Weiner said. “If there’s no limit then you spend all your time trying to raise money from big donors and those are the people you talk to. You don’t spend time talking to the little guy and that’s going to impact your policy.”

Candidates for federal office are subject to federal campaign contribution limits. For example, an individual can only give up to $2,600 to each candidate in the election cycle. Individuals can also only give up to $34,400 to a national party in a calendar year.

Though Oregon might not top lists for most corrupt states, it doesn’t mean money doesn’t factor in, officials said.

“Quid pro quo corruption is very hard to prove,” Weiner said. “It’s very hard to document specific instances of that. Our history is full of evidence that it’s fairly common place. I think it’s indisputable that at least money buys access and when you have large contributions.”

Left Out

In addition to the quid pro quo that big campaign money can result in, the high dollars can also be discouraging, experts and advocates say.

“Overwhelmingly we see that there’s a lot of public concern in Oregon and actually around the country about the distorting influence of big money,” Common Cause Executive Director Kate Titus said.

Critics argue that big money donations mean more often than not wealthy people with wealthy connections will run for office, leaving others out in the cold. And it can discourage those who might donate a little, making them feel that their voices are not being heard, Weiner said.

“There is lots of anecdotal evidence, at least, that people feel all the money flowing into our system has deprived them of their own voice,” he said. “More and more people are asking why should I even bother voting.”

An Upside

But limitless campaign contributions are not all bad, experts say.

Because the money goes directly to candidates, it’s more often disclosed and usually clearer who is donating.

“In Oregon, more money might mean more open (elections),” Weiner said. “That money is at least transparent.”

While most states and the federal government limit or prohibit corporations giving money to candidates, Oregon allows it. Republican candidate for governor Dennis Richardson, for example, got his biggest contribution from Seneca Timber Co. at $235,000, according to a new website called HackOregon.org, which is dedicated to “lifting the veil of local campaign finance."

“Yet Oregon isn’t among the corrupt states in the country,” said Ilya Shaprio, senior fellow of constitutional studies at the Cato Institute. “That might be a good example for the federal system.”

Shapiro argues that limiting campaign contributions does nothing to solve political corruption.

“The states around the country that don’t have contribution limits, there’s no correlation to the states that are the most corrupt,” he said. “If what’s going on in Oegon works for Oregon and the people are confident and secure in their political process I don’t see any reason to change it.”

Finance Reform

Oregon’s limitless campaign contributions are set in the state constitution and cannot be changed without a public vote. In 2006, voters considered a ballot measure to limit campaign contributions.

But confusion over two measures resulted in no action, Titus said. The measure that would have strictly limited contributions - $500 in statewide races and no contributions from unions or corporations - passed. But the measure giving the state the authority to enact the limits failed.

An effort to bring campaign contribution limits back is in the works for the 2015 legislative session, Titus said.

“Contribution limits is one of the key tools in the campaign finance reform,” she added.

Titus said officials and advocates are working on a bill that would ask lawmakers to refer campaign contribution limits to the ballot.

Weiner said campaign contribution limits could only help Oregon.

“The fact that Oregon isn’t, you know, one of the most corrupt states, doesn’t mean that its politics wouldn’t be better if there were reasonable contribution limits,” Weiner said.

Related Slideshow: Slideshow: Oregon Candidates’ Biggest Donors

Oregon candidates rake in the big bucks this election cycles. Oreogn is one of just four states with no limit on the amount of campaign contirubtions that individuals, PACs, corporations and others can donate to candidates. The result is some big money from a select few.

slides: Oregon Candidates and Their Biggest Donors

Left Out

An Upside

Finance Reform

Related Slideshow: Slideshow: Oregon Candidates’ Biggest Donors

Governor

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Most Popular Articles

Sign Up for the Daily Eblast

Sign Up for the Daily Eblast