Unconstitutional Campaign Finance Law Challenged By ACLU

The ACLU argued in federal court on Dec. 9 and 10 that the Connecticut campaign finance law unconstitutionally discriminates against minor party candidates and violates their rights to free speech and freedom of association. In July 2006, the ACLU of Connecticut filed the lawsuit challenging the state law on behalf of several plaintiffs, including the Connecticut Green Party and Libertarian Party.

“Connecticut’s campaign finance law imposes two different sets of rules for major and minor party candidates, making it very easy for major party candidates to qualify for public funding, while at the same time making it substantially more difficult for minor party candidates,” said Mark Lopez, a cooperating attorney with the ACLU.

In addition to the requirements for candidates from the Democratic and Republican parties, candidates from minor parties that did not receive at least 20 percent of the vote in the previous election must collect signatures from at least 20 percent of voters to qualify for full funding.

During the first day of the trial, Attorney Lopez quoted affidavits from former Connecticut Gov. Lowell Weicker Jr. that support the ACLU’s claim that the new campaign finance law creates extra burdens for minor party candidates. Weicker, who ran for governor in 1990 as a third-party candidate, asserted that he could not have met these additional requirements for getting public campaign finance funds, if the campaign finance law had been in effect in 1990. Donald Green, a political science professor at Yale, defended upholding the law as written saying a challenge might bring down an “inherently frail system.”

The ruling is expected to be appealed, regardless of the way the judge rules. The ACLU believes that public campaign financing changes the dynamics in state elections by making it exceedingly difficult for minor party candidates to qualify for public financing of their election campaigns.