County Issue / Campaign Contributions :...

Judy Mikels, Simi Valley city councilwoman

Technically, yes, I think there should be a limit. But the only problem I have with that is, if it were going to happen, it should be statewide. To impose it on one municipality may look good to the voters,but it doesn’t mean a lot and just makes it more difficult to campaign. I think the supervisors would admit it was a public relations move. None of them have been accused of accepting illegal campaign contributions. It was Supervisor Maria VanderKolk’s idea, to renew the faith of the voters. If the elected officials would start taking their jobs seriously instead of worrying about getting votes, then we, elected officials and the voters, would be better off. There is no way that a $200 contribution is going to make a difference to me. It’s somewhat different for me in that I decided to run late, so we worked with what we raised. I didn’t build up a large war chest. With the economy being tight, you’re not going to get big contributions. And other people are so dismayed that they don’t want to get involved. So, a campaign contribution limit may come of its own volition. Theoretically, yes, it’s a good idea. Is it practical? No.

Maria VanderKolk, Ventura County supervisor

Absolutely, they should limit campaign contributions. I think that depending on the office--whether it’s federal, state or local--the amount should change. I think it would be difficult to run for a federal office on a $1,000 per person, per election cycle limit. I think it’s something that will have to start at the local level and swell to the federal level. There is a lot of grass-roots movement. The public has very little faith in politics. With the “Keating Five” scandal and the other things you hear, people think that politicians are bought and paid for. Regardless if that’s true or not, the perception is there. We need to get politics back to what it should be: walking precincts and meeting people instead of negative campaigns and slick advertisements. We need to get back to the basics. It’s particularly important at the local level. It’s outrageous that hundreds of thousands of dollars are being spent in local elections when that money could be spent in better ways. Because Proposition 73 was thrown out, there is no limit on contributions in the state of California at this time except in areas that have adopted regulations.

Larry Janss, President, Janss Recreation Inc.

I certainly approve of the restrictions because those who are in a position to make large contributions in the tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars--even $5,000--don’t necessarily represent the general public. It’s a democratic move to make limits on campaign contributions. If everybody has one vote each, why should the wealthy and empowered be entitled to a larger share of the influence that large campaign contributions can bring? I applaud Maria VanderKolk for putting a self-imposed limit of $250 on her campaign. I’m sure that those with a vested interest and great financial clout will howl that this is a violation of their First Amendment rights. That is an arguable point because it is also a violation of the rights of people who can’t contribute large amounts of money to be disenfranchised by a smaller group. This law doesn’t preclude people from pounding the pavement, stuffing envelopes and volunteering their time for their candidate of choice if they want to participate beyond the financial limitations set forth by this legislation.

Paul Lawrason, Mayor, Moorpark

I am not in favor of legislating the level of campaign contributions. I think the Fair Political Practices Commission and the regulations that are in place presently really serve to keep candidates in line and serve to give them a sense of integrity. I think anyone can think the process through and realize there could be conflicts and that large amounts of contributions could have obligations. I’ve gone on record saying there are no strings attached to contributions that I receive. I’ve always screened all of my contributions to make sure they were coming from legitimate sources and were of a reasonable amount. I want to be scrupulous. I think the process by itself and the regulations that are in place are reasonable and do a good job of keeping people in line. People have to have enough integrity to regulate themselves. I understand the problems and the improprieties of some individuals in the past. I believe that candidates need to exercise caution and good judgment. I find it onerous that someone should arbitrarily determine what amount contributions should be.

Kathryn Fellows, President, League of Women Voters of Ventura County

The League of Women Voters basically supports realistic limits on contributions by individuals and by groups. The public reporting of contributions and expenditures is another important aspect of this and of course, the effort is to broaden the base of campaign financing to give the individual voter a greater voice. This is a national concern of the League of Women Voters. It’s the effort of the national League to take back the system through several things, including campaign finance reform and voter registration through driver’s license renewal, called “motor voter.” The state League is working in the same direction and our local League supported this legislation which the supervisors adopted. I would hope in the legislation they included that the requirement be extended to local measures as well. It’s wonderful that the supervisors have passed this ordinance and we’re hoping that all of the cities and agencies that participate in the election process in the county will follow suit.