In the state Senate, David Paterson was a backer of public financing for political campaigns.
But the question is becoming an increasingly less academic one for New York, with a report of recommendations due out at the end of November on how such a system might work in coming election cycles.
And Paterson, the former governor who served from 2007 to 2011, in a New York Daily News op/ed published Wednesday afternoon enumerated the concerns that could have been uttered by those who are skeptical of a broad-based public financing system as well as fusion voting, which allows candidates to run on multiple ballot lines.
In the op/ed, Paterson notes:
- Public financing is not popular with voters, according to polling.
- Public financing could be too expensive if done incorrectly.
- Minor parties could be created to make public financing a “business opportunity.”
- Fusion voting has enabled to rise of minor parties that are vehicles for power (not mentioned is the Women’s Equality Party, which was formed at Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s behest in 2014).
Much of the concerns raised by Paterson — and the potential solutions such as limiting matching funds to in-district contributions — have been raised in one way or another by Jay Jacobs, the state Democratic Party chairman the governor appointed to the commission.
- Cuomo Appointee Says Commission Needs To Look at Changing Requirements for Ballot Access
- Should Taxpayer Dollars Be Spent on Political Campaigns?
- New York Comptroller Urges Commission To Keep Fusion Voting
Paterson isn’t just a former governor, either. He’s been retained as the public face of an effort to award a downstate casino license to the Las Vegas Sands.
He is also Jacobs’s predecessor as state party chairman, appointed to the post by Cuomo.
The op/ed suggests a tightly conscripted form of public campaign finance, one that advocates may be ultimately disappointed in, is possible.