From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Sun Dec 26 22:58:40 2010 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 03:58:40 +0000 Subject: {news} Scott Deshefy on CT campaign finance law Message-ID: http://www.norwichbulletin.com/newsnow/x1651494933/Locals-back-Supreme-Court-finance-law-petition Locals back Supreme Court finance law petition Deshefy, Reale say Connecticut system cripples third parties By JAMES MOSHER Norwich Bulletin Posted Dec 24, 2010 @ 01:44 PM Washington, D.C. ? Two local men that ran for Congress this year are supporting an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court aimed at getting Connecticut?s campaign finance law declared discriminatory against third-party candidates. A group including Connecticut?s Green and Libertarian parties as well as the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court in Washington. The group wants the high court to review decisions including the Second Circuit Court of Appeals? ruling in Green Party of Connecticut vs. Garfield and the Ninth Circuit?s position in McComish vs. Bennett. Third-party candidates in Connecticut including G. Scott? Deshefy of Lebanon and Daniel Reale of Plainfield, who were the Green and Libertarian candidates for Congress in the 2nd District in 2008 and 2010, respectively, object to a portion of the Garfield decision that holds money ?trigger provisions? of Connecticut?s law don?t discriminate against third-party candidates. The law, which went into effect in 2006 in the wake of corruption scandals, favors Democrat and Republican party candidates to the detriment of the third-party hopefuls, the locals and their lawyers argue. The obstacles are much greater in Connecticut, they contend. ?The most glaring indictment that current CFRA (Campaign Finance Reform Act) is corruption on stilts is that CT is the only state to impose such highly improbable, if not logistically impossible for statewide offices, hurdles on opposition party candidates to access public funding,? Deshefy wrote in an e-mail. The Citizens Election Program section of the CFRA automatically provide additional funds to candidates that participate in Connecticut?s public funds program when the expenditures of privately funded opponents or independent third-party candidates reach a certain threshold. The Second Circuit ruled the CEP?s qualification criteria and distribution formulae, which determine what candidates qualify to receive matching funds and in what amounts, were not unconstitutional as they did not discriminate against so-called ?minor? party candidates. Deshefy recommends an experiment he says would prove third-party candidates can win in Connecticut. U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman was re-elected as an independent candidate in 2006 and Lowell Weicker, a former U.S. senator, was elected governor in 1990 as a third-party candidate although both were much more well known than most third-party candidates. ?The test is to allow the same access to CEP for third parties as in other nondiscriminatory states (even if for a few election cycles as a pilot case) and see if greater access to campaign finance and thereby the media would not lead to more elected third-party candidates,? Deshefy wrote. The group?s ?Questions Presented? section of its Supreme Court petition, which asks whether Connecticut?s law is ?more onerous than any others,? is ?appropriated worded,? Reale wrote. U.S. District Judge Stefan Underhill struck down portions of Connecticut?s campaign finance law as unconstitutional in August 2009. The Second Circuit issued its ruling in July 2010. ? Copyright 2010 Norwich Bulletin.