http://rochesterturning.com/2008/04/28/poll-says-3-of-4-new-yorkers-support-publicly-financed-elections/ turning the tide upstate Tue, 02 Dec 2008 06:21:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 http://rochesterturning.com/2008/04/28/poll-says-3-of-4-new-yorkers-support-publicly-financed-elections/#comment-138234 Historical Pessimist Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:06:13 +0000 http://rochesterturning.com/2008/04/28/poll-says-3-of-4-new-yorkers-support-publicly-financed-elections/#comment-138234 It's NOT a bad idea. I know from my Assembly race against an entrenched, well-funded incumbent that public financing is the closest thing we have to a magic bullet when it comes to reforming Albany. And I can easily be convinced that we really can't reform Albany without it (more collateral damage from the Spitzer implosion, I'm afraid). But what really frightens me is the Nation article Grievous Angel blogged about over the weekend which covers Jack Davis' lawsuit against the Millionaire's Amendment. The piece suggests that the Court, which seems likely to side with Davis, will invalidate not only the Millionaire's Amendment but Clean Money Clean Elections systems that have been adopted because they share "trigger" provisions that seemed to be a particular focus of the justices' question. It’s NOT a bad idea. I know from my Assembly race against an entrenched, well-funded incumbent that public financing is the closest thing we have to a magic bullet when it comes to reforming Albany. And I can easily be convinced that we really can’t reform Albany without it (more collateral damage from the Spitzer implosion, I’m afraid). But what really frightens me is the Nation article Grievous Angel blogged about over the weekend which covers Jack Davis’ lawsuit against the Millionaire’s Amendment. The piece suggests that the Court, which seems likely to side with Davis, will invalidate not only the Millionaire’s Amendment but Clean Money Clean Elections systems that have been adopted because they share “trigger” provisions that seemed to be a particular focus of the justices’ question.

]]>