Measure K will help level the playing field between grassroots candidates, corporate spenders

Folsom's City Council has moved to include several Charter amendments on the November ballot. Theywould amend the charter to (i) clarify that the City Attorney answers to the City Council as the clientrather than the City Manager (Measure I), (ii) empower boards and commissions with more authority(Measure J) and (iii) increase the contribution limit to candidates for city council from $150 to $500(Measure K). While I support all three of these measures, Measure K bears discussion as it touches a sensitive area: money in politics. The initial reaction to raising the financial contribution limit to candidates for city council may naturallybe: "But shouldn't we get money out of politics? Wouldn't increasing the limit only increase money'sinfluence in Folsom's elections?" As someone who decries Citizens United (the Supreme Court decision allowing unlimited spending inpolitics by corporations and political action committees (PACs)), let me tell you that I empathize with thatreaction. More money in politics is not how we create a healthy democratic state, and we as citizensshould be trying to decouple our political process from the impact of big money. But there are severalreasons that make our situation different. Consider a few facts: Past Folsom City Council Elections have seen corporate entities and PACs spend hundreds ofthousands in City Council elections as independent expenditures. These same PACs outspend our individual city council candidates' campaigns, and have nofinancial cap. The current $150 cap to City Council candidates means candidates have to raise from a broadpool of individuals to try to compete with PAC advertising. There is no financial limit for Folsom Cordova School Board races. Without overturning Citizens United, we cannot eliminate the ability of PACs to spend freely inour electoral process. In this context, the increase of the contribution limit is less about putting more money into politics andmore about empowering candidates to financially compete with independent expenditures. Because whatrecent election data has shown us is that the $150 contribution limit has perversely limited our candidates'voices relative to corporations. When two PACs spend well over $100,000 while the average amountraised by a candidate is roughly $22,000, we end up in a situation where the financial cap is lettingcorporate spenders have a disproportionate impact on our local elections. That's not healthy for ourdiscourse, political process or community. Here's what sitting Councilmember Barbara Leary has to say about Measure K: "increasing this limit willallow candidates to better present their positions, untainted by corporate influence." Let's also be clear about the $500 figure. $500 is roughly one-twelfth of the $5,900 limit for StateAssembly and Senate races, and a fraction of the $3,500-per-election federal limit for Congress. So while$500 may seem like a lot, this limit is significantly lower than other limits. To ensure that Folsom residents have a greater say in who we elect, Folsom voters should approveMeasure K. Doing so would be healthy for our community's dialogue, electoral process and politics. Julian Sarafian is the President of the Folsom Area Democratic Club, and was born and raised inFolsom.