A plan for voter-owned elections

My wife Colleen jokes that I never ran for office. She's right. My first run was more of a walk.

In 2003, I knocked on more than 20,000 doors to speak directly with the voters about the issues. Walking was a wonderful way of running a campaign — and it proved to be very effective.

But despite all that doorbelling, I still wouldn't have won without money. As an underdog facing a 20-year incumbent, I had to raise about $100,000 to run a credible challenge. These funds allowed me to leverage my doorbell campaign to build name familiarity through numerous mailings, and turned my long-shot, grass-roots race into a narrow victory.

I was lucky. I had better access to campaign funds than most challengers. Having worked at a large Seattle law firm, I could count on a network of well-paid, well-connected attorneys to contribute to my campaign. Friends and family also donated generously, even when it was difficult for them to do so.

For many good citizens who contemplate running for office, the challenge of fundraising is an insurmountable obstacle. But now, there is an alternative. The Washington state Legislature has passed a bill allowing local jurisdictions to enact public campaign financing.

Here's how it works. Candidates qualify for full public financing if they demonstrate viability by raising a set number of small contributions from a large number of voters. For example, in a King County Council race, candidates might qualify if they raised $5 contributions from 500 individuals, entitling them to receive enough funding — say $80,000 — to run a credible campaign.

While these are the basic elements of a public-financing system, any plan the King County Council develops to bring public financing to our local races will require approval by vote of the people. Seven states and large cities such as Portland, Ore., and Albuquerque, N.M., have established programs for voter-owned elections, and are realizing their many benefits.

Public campaign financing removes the undue influence of special interests. It also promotes competition for office. On the King County Council, it is rare to see a serious challenge to incumbents, and the fundraising disparity between challenger and incumbent is one of the primary reasons incumbents rarely face serious competition to retain their seats.

Raising money takes a tremendous amount of time. Public financing allows candidates to focus on what matters — engaging citizens on the issues, not dialing for dollars. It also opens up the electoral process to a wider range of citizens. Our current system is often a test of who can raise the most money rather than who has the best ideas.

In Maine, more than 80 percent of the candidates for Legislature opt for public financing. More people are participating in politics there than ever before. The number of contested primaries rose 40 percent and more female candidates emerged after Maine instituted this reform.

King County recently passed legislation Councilmember Dow Constantine and I introduced to develop a plan for voter-owned elections in King County. The study and road map that emerge from the legislation will allow us to determine whether we can afford to institute publicly financed elections, and if so, what model will work best for King County.

The county is facing significant budget challenges. As chairman of the operating budget committee, I am very mindful that it may take time before we can adequately fund a public-campaign-financing program. In the meantime, it may be more appropriate to begin with a pilot program for only a limited number of county elected offices, such as King County Council seats.

Every once in a while, a truly transformative campaign comes along with the power to launch new ideas, bring new activists into the fold and build faith in government. Public campaign financing promises to make elections about the voters again, not the special interests.

And like a good day of doorbelling, that's a breath of fresh air.