I personally think that money has too much of an influence in our elections, whether it be federal, state, or local elections. I think it's bad for democracy and bad for citizens if money plays a bigger role than the issues do.

That being said, I do not fault any voter for supporting a candidate they like by contributing to their campaign, up to some reasonable limit. I personally don't accept donations over $500 from any one person, which has resulted in returning donations in the past.

On the other hand, while it is legal, I think it is ethically ambiguous, at best, for a candidate for public office to accept campaign contributions from groups or companies that will be negotiating with or seeking approval from the city (or district, state, etc) during the next term of office. This inescapably gives the appearance of a conflict of interest for that office holder, between the special interests of their benefactors and the people's interests (not always compatible).

Voters would be smart to take factors like this into account.

Maybe the excess money could be given back to the community, perhaps a donation to the library? Just a thought, I wouldn't fault any candidate for using the money for future campaigns or office expenditures, as it was meant to be used.

The PA Daily Post article on this (October 4 page 4) Margaret Abe-Koga ("mak") got offered:
$1,500 MV Professional Firefighters union
$500 Santa Clara Firefighters union
$500 Palo Alto Fireighters union
$2000 total, almost 1/10 of the offers to her campaign

where there are Firefighter's union $$ there is Smoke? recycle "mak" if this is your style of public elected official

Maybe it's time for Mountain View to move to publicly financed elections.
Just last week, Governor Brown signed a new law allowing all cities to move to publicly financed elections (Charter Cities already had that right).
In addition to keeping special interest/lobbyists money away from candidates, publicly funded elections would also level the playing field and expand it by allowing more equally qualified but less moneyed candidates to run. It could also greatly simplify reporting and monitoring requirements.
Publicly financed elections would not necessarily be entirely funded by the City or taxpayers: lobbyists, corporations, citizens could contribute to a public election fund that would divide funds equally between candidates.

Absolutely I support public financing of elections.

Our goal for the Carpenter4MountainView campaign is a maximum of $2700 ($27 average donation) with primary objective to have volunteers support us rather than special interest groups. This is based on experience volunteering for Bernie Sanders at the National level with small individual contributions ($27) rather than SuperPacs and lobbyists where billions will be spent this year on the Presidential election alone.

Mountain View has so many amazing candidate forums and events available for the candidates and the shift to public funded campaigns would set a new standard.

Instead, think about what we could do with the $millions and $billions towards our priorities programs and services rather than printing brochures and mailers for special interests.


Ken “Kacey” Carpenter, Candidate, Mountain View City Council

http://www.carpenter4mountainview.com