!"!

#

!"# "#$%&%'$%( )*&$+%'

$%"&# ,*&%# -./*&001 2+$+3%# 4.$+5# 50 6%7 85&9
:*# 2*#$5&1 ;5&9+#< =*>+?+%'
:*@+( :5##%??A1 )BC?+. 2*>D*+<# 4.$+5# =B#(

'()*# 4D&+? EF1 GHEI

+,# JB%'$+5#+#< JB+##+D+*.K' )5??


In anothei suivey in theii long line of suiveys that unuei-measuie the bioau
suppoit foi compiehensive campaign finance iefoim, incluuing small-uonoi public
financing, Quinnipiac ieleaseu new finuings this moining that claimeu voteis uo not
back public financing as a way to auuiess the iecent coiiuption scanuals. The
Quinnipiac poll has always shown low suppoit anu has always been an outliei.

Touay's suivey is no uiffeient. Not only is this suivey an outliei on the question of
public suppoit foi ueep systemic iefoims, but it's haiuly suipiising that iecent news
of political coiiuption by theii electeu officials has uamageu New Yoikeis tiust in
theii goveinment.

Put plainly, if you talk about giving public money to canuiuates uuiing a coiiuption
scanual without simultaneously uiscussing enfoicement anu othei iefoim
mechanisms - as Faii Elections always has - it's haiu to see how voteis woulu be
inclineu to suppoit it.

Bowevei, a wealth of expeiience shows that public campaign finance is an essential
piece of any effoit to clean up Albany because it's the only way to iemove the
coiiosive impact of big money in elections.

The questionnaiie uiafteis at Quinnipiac consistently unueisell New Yoikeis'
capacity foi unueistanuing public policy matteis by failing to uesciibe what is
actually being pioposeu in Albany. At best, this suivey uistiacts policymakeis fiom
cleai analysis; at woist, Quinnipiac's polling institute has biases that blinu it fiom
piouucing accuiate analysis. In eithei case, these iesults pioviue little illumination
on a mattei of gieat impoitance to the state - whethei elections will continue to be
uiiven by big money playeis oi whethei New Yoik can have elections of, by, anu foi
the people. Below aie thiee impoitant specific points to consiuei:

1. The Quinnipiac suivey is an outliei. Bistoiically, the Siena College suivey has
founu suppoit foi compiehensive iefoim at 61 peicent to SS peicent. A
suivey conuucteu by Lake Reseaich Paitneis foi Public Campaign Action
Funu in Becembei founu 79 peicent of New Yoikeis backeu a compiehensive
package of iefoims that incluues public financing. But the Quinnipiac suivey
has always unueipeifoimeu the iest with finuings of SS peicent opposeu
touay anu S1 peicent opposeu in Becembei, a poll that was conuucteu
aiounu the same time as the Lake Reseaich suivey.

2. Quinnipiac's question fails to accuiately uesciibe the pioposal in Albany.
Consiuei the following two suivey questions:

%&'()* "Bo you suppoit oi oppose cieating a system of public campaign
financing in New Yoik that woulu limit the size of political contiibutions to
canuiuates anu use state money to match smallei contiibutions maue to
canuiuates foi state offices."

+,&((&-&).: "Bo you suppoit oi oppose public financing of campaigns foi
goveinoi, othei statewiue offices anu the state legislatuie."

Siena gives votes infoimation about the pioposal. Quinnipiac uoesn't.

S. The moie infoimation voteis heai about the pioposal, the moie they suppoit
it. The Lake Reseaich poll in Becembei askeu:

-."/ 1 (& 2"342 )" %*(5 6"7 ( 8%"8"9(: )" %*;"%& )<* %":* "; &"4*6 34
8":3)3=9# !<39 8%"8"9(: 8%">35*9 ?7(:3;3*5 =(4535()*9 ( :3&3)*5 (&"74) ";
87@:3= &()=<342 ;7459 3; )<*6 (2%** )" %(39* 9&(:: 5"4()3"49 "4:6 ;%"&
>")*%9 34 )<* 539)%3=) /<*%* )<*6 (%* %744342 ;"% ";;3=*A !<*%* /"7:5 @*
:"/*% ="4)%3@7)3"4 :3&3)9B 539=:"97%* "; 98*45342 @6 "7)935* 2%"789B (45
9)%3=) *4;"%=*&*4) "; (:: =(&8(324 ;34(4=* :(/9A !<39 8%"8"9(: /"7:5
34=:75* (:: %(=*9 ;"% .*/ C"%D 9)()* ";;3=*9A '" 6"7 ;(>"% "% "88"9* )<39
8%"8"9(: )" %*;"%& <"/ &"4*6 34 8":3)3=9 34;:7*4=*9 *:*=)3"49B "% (%* 6"7
745*=35*5EF

That question was suppoiteu by 79 peicent of iesponuents, incluuing 8S
peicent of Bemociats, 79% of Inuepenuents, anu 74 peicent of Republicans.

* * *