Seattle is offering voters $100 in “democracy vouchers” to donate to political candidates in an effort to limit big money in politics and boost civic involvement in elections.
Earlier this month, the first of the vouchers were mailed out for its inaugural run in citywide races in the fall.
The program is the first of its kind in the country and was supported by nearly two-thirds of voters in King County, Wash., as a ballot measure in 2015. In its run-up to the election, the “Honest Elections” measure, or Initiative 122, was touted as a way to motivate lesser-known candidates to run for office.
“We have expensive city council races that are funded by about 2 percent of the population. As a result, there’s a small number of wealthy people and lobbyists who end up having too much influence and access,” said Collin Jergens, communications director for Fuse, a liberal group that belongs to Honest Elections Seattle, which introduced the initiative.
The four $25 vouchers each person received from the Seattle Ethics and Election Commission can be split among candidates or given to one. Voters’ donations will be listed on the city’s website.
Candidates must opt into the program and attain a certain number of contributions to be eligible. For the political newcomer, that process entails rallying public support, rather than soliciting a few large donations from wealthy donors.
Politicians who opt in may accept an additional $250 from outside individuals or corporations. Mayoral candidates are limited to spending $800,000 during the campaign, city attorney and district seats are capped at $150,000, and city council at-large seats are limited to $300,000. Candidates who do not opt in can accept up to $500 from outside sources and there is no cap on the amount the campaign can spend.
“Voucher system is very exciting because every voter in the city will have an opportunity in the city to give a small contribution without having to use any money from their own pocket,” said Brent Ferguson, counsel in the Brennan Center’s Democracy program, where he works on the Money in Politics team. Ferguson said his organization has worked for a long time promoting public financing systems that encourage small donors to give donations to candidates.
He added that the program will keep excessive money out of politicians’ campaign coffers because candidates will rely on mostly small donations than ones from big donors.
Funding the measure has been an issue of contention. The measure mandated a 10-year, $30 million property tax levy or $3 million annually. Renters and homeowners are taxed based on their rent or mortgage page. According to Zillow, the median home value in Seattle, $612,400, so the owner will pay $15.30 per year for the program.
Former election commission chairman Robert Mahon said the program will “deliver little or no public benefit” despite its “relatively small” cost.
“In a time of increasing budget pressure, I don’t think our property taxes are best spent subsidizing political contributions and building a bureaucracy to manage it,” Mahon said. In his opinion, the city’s five mayors in the past two decades are evidence the city has healthy turnover. Still, the partner with tax law firm Perkins Coie LLP in Seattle said his greatest concern is cost.
The program is expected to cost $28 in administrative expenses for every $100 in vouchers, according to a 2015 estimate. Mahon said based on 2016 budget estimates, those costs are now forecast to be $60. The 2017 administrative costs are expected to hit $975,000 this year, on top of the $3 million for the vouchers themselves.
“I can tell you now my instinct is that public financing of elections compels people to support politicians whose positions they don’t support, and so I think it is not a good idea,” economist Andrea Mays said.
Still, proponents such as Jergen are hopeful the program will succeed and be picked up by other localities who see the vouchers as a way to “empower” low- to middle-income individuals. They want the current rate of 1.5 percent of Seattle residents donating to political campaigns to increase to 4 or even 14 percent. Minnesota has the highest percentage, with 5 percent of residents donating.
