While
it lacks important contextual background and sometimes reads as if it supports
a hidden agenda, a series
about campaign finance law regarding donations by The New Orleans Times-Picayune and WVUE brings up an interesting
question regarding donations
to Louisiana’s Public Service Commission. But, just as the best answer to
questions about limits to candidates for statewide executive, Board of
Elementary and Secondary Education, and legislative spots is perhaps not what
the series authors would support, so is the best answer to the same question
regarding the PSC also not something that its commissioners or self-styled reformers
would support.
The
argument for restricting donations to candidate for these other positions not
only is for the most part intellectually lazy, but it also tramples free speech
rights. The case against donations because they buy influence is almost without
qualification rejected by political science research, although they do serve to
buy access. Still, with access easily obtainable this way by a multitude of
interests, and with independent-minded policy-makers out there who are expert
at playing off interests against each other constrained only by their constituents,
it’s clear that no one interest has any structural advantage over any other.
Better
supported as a point of concern is the notion that contributions may put a donor close to the head of
the line in terms of appointments to boards and commissions, although almost
all of these officers have little power and do not receive a salary, but as appointees
are expected (or at least anticipated) by appointers to follow that person’s
issue preferences, their decisions end up reflecting by and large the will of
the majority of the public who put the appointers into the offices where they
may appoint. Thus, there is no problem of democratic deficit or having certain
interests with outsized influence here, either.