The Facts


Hamilton

“We already pay for congressional campaigns, we just label it ‘the national debt.’ Interests that donate to campaigns often get what they want from legislation, and we all pay for that; by comparison, public financing seems like a bargain.”

 - Lee Hamilton
Former Congressman from Indiana
ACR Advisory Board Member

Fair Elections: State Track Record of Success

Print This Post

Download this fact sheet as a PDF

For nearly a decade, five states have been pioneering a sweeping new alternative to traditional big money campaigns: Fair or Clean Elections public funding of legislative, executive, and judicial campaigns. In Maine (since 2000), Arizona (2000), and Connecticut (2006), candidates for any state office may qualify with small donations to receive sufficient public funding to mount a competitive campaign; in return, candidates limit spending and say no to special interest contributions. In New Mexico and North Carolina, similar reforms are in place for judicial and Public Regulatory Commission elections, respectively. This report considers the two states with the longest track record on Fair Elections, Maine and Arizona.

  1. Candidates Favor Fair Elections
    • 64% of candidates elected to the Arizona legislature in 2008 ran under Fair Elections, up from 42% in 2006.
    • Six out of eight Arizona statewide officials currently serving were elected with Fair Elections.
    • 85% of candidates elected to state office in Maine in 2008 ran under Fair Elections, up from 84% in 2006.
    • 81% of candidates elected to the Connecticut General Assembly in 2008 were Fair Elections candidates, in the first cycle for Fair Elections in the state.
  2. Increased Access and Competition
    • Since adoption of Fair Elections in Arizona in 2000, the average number of candidates for state office has increased 23%, significantly reducing the number of uncontested races.
    • Since adoption of Fair Elections in Maine in 2000, the average number of uncontested races has dropped to three, from 31 in the decade prior to implementation.
    • Women and minorities are more likely than other candidates to run with Fair Elections: more than double the number of minority candidates and 18% more women candidates ran for state office in Arizona and Maine, respectively, after implementation.
  3. Increased Citizen Participation
    • Voter turnout in Maine and Arizona increased by 10% from 1998-2002, the nearest mid-term election before and after implementation of Fair Elections, an increase of twice the national rate; turnout has continued to rise above the national rate in each successive election.
    • The number and influence of small donors in Maine and Arizona elections has steadily increased: a study of Arizona gubernatorial contributions found a 3-fold increase from 11,234 in 1998 to 38,579 in 2002, with the majority of contributors earning $50,000 or less.

Sources: Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices, U.S. Census Bureau, Maine Citizens for Clean Elections, Arizona Clean Elections Institute, Connecticut Common Cause, Public Campaign