It’s Time to Reform Campaign Reform : * Measure T Would Do the Job and Deserves Support

Orange County’s current campaign reform ordinance has done what it was intended to do during the last 14 years. But it’s time to update, simplify and toughen up the ordinance, which is commonly known by its acronym TINCUP (Time Is Now, Clean Up Politics). Measure T, on the June 2 ballot, would do just that. It deserves strong support from those who want to ensure clean government in Orange County in the future.

The adoption of TINCUP 14 years ago marked the end of a particularly shameful era of political and campaign scandals in county politics. By the time the worst was over, three members of the Board of Supervisors were indicted. One of them, Ralph A. Diedrich, went to prison.

Angry voters reacted by instituting strict limits on how much board members could accept from contributors and still vote on matters concerning those donors. Because most contributions are made with the hope of ingratiating the donor to the recipient, TINCUP proved to be pretty much self-enforcing--as long as someone was keeping track of who had given what to whom and when. The limits, which increase yearly with inflation, now require recipients to abstain from voting on matters that affect donors from whom they receive more than $1,944 during a four-year period.

TINCUP, however, proved to have shortcomings. The major problem came with the emergence of political action committees as a major force in American politics at all levels of government. TINCUP does not even mention PACs, and contributors learned soon enough that all they had to do to get around it was to form a PAC. A Times Orange County Edition investigation a year ago found that PACs had donated more than $820,000 to county supervisor candidates during the previous 14 years--none of which had to be reported under current law.

There were other problems as well. These included difficulty keeping track of reporting periods that rotated with each donation rather than being defined by election cycles. Clearly, it was time to reform campaign reform.

It was a disappointment that the drive to update the law did not come from the Board of Supervisors. But at least the board has recognized that, when it comes to reform, it had better step out of the way of Shirley Grindle, the political watchdog who first put together TINCUP, and who is the prime mover behind its sequel. Only Supervisor Don R. Roth, who has had his troubles lately when it comes to reporting gifts from persons with business before the board, grumbled about “TINCUP II.” In the end, however, he joined the unanimous board to put it on the June 2 ballot.

The major provision of Measure T caps all contributions and loans to candidates at $1,000 per contributor, per election; candidates who face a runoff could raise an additional $1,000 per contributor. The limits would be extended to include all elected county officials, including sheriff, district attorney, assessor, treasurer-tax collector, county clerk, recorder, auditor, public administrator and superintendent of schools. Another major provision would allow county officeholders who want to run for different posts to set up separate fund-raising committees for those efforts.

At the behest of Grindle, TINCUP II was drafted by Robert M. Stern, co-director of the nonprofit California Commission on Campaign Financing, which has advised government agencies on campaign reform for many years. If passed--and the prospects appear bright--it will be among the toughest campaign laws in the state. That would be good news indeed for Orange County.