CLEVELAND -- We are amidst Cleveland’s first open mayor’s race in 16 years. The seven-candidate primary brought us good, disappointing, and bad news – all relevant to the general election.
The good news: The primary was well-conducted, with candidates attending numerous public forums and open debates, generating broad media attention. These days, a smooth election process with clear results is an accomplishment. It produced two very different candidates, and I believe the voters will choose wisely.
The disappointing news: Not enough voters voted. Cleveland is a city where mayors can drive or depress the very health and well-being of the city and region. We need stronger civic engagement and more voters from every ward. With a few exceptions, we did not see it in the primary. The campaigns and the media must urge and drive turnout higher this fall – for the sake of local democracy, and our city.
The bad news (and the point of this essay): Anonymous sources and “dark money” blatantly tried to influence voters with large sums of money that veiled donors’ names. I have worked in the business community for decades, and it is embarrassing, to say the least, since I suspect that many of the sources of dark money are business owners. Fortunately, and apparently not by design, some of the contributors may be publicly revealed in early 2022. That is too late.
This is not the first time for dark money in Cleveland, but it should be the last.
Dark money is legal because of the Citizens United case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, but it is unequivocally bad for Cleveland. By telling hidden contributors “not to worry” and “nobody will know,” special interests can execute shameful attacks without taking responsibility.
Cleveland voters deserve to know who is paying for independent expenditures either for or against candidates for mayor. These amount to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in mailers, ads, and other media to influence voters. We deserve to know who is paying for these, if they are following the law, and whom we can hold accountable for false claims, smears, distorted images, and the chilling impact negativity has on the electorate.
Anyone planning a dark money strategy should stop, for the good of the whole community. If you like a candidate, for your own (hopefully good) reasons, fine! Just be transparent about it!
This seems especially true if, like me, you don’t live in the city proper. I believe Justin Bibb makes the best case for positive change and has the most upside leadership potential. My contribution to his campaign will be fully reported – as all campaign contributions and expenditures should be.
I hope ridding local elections of dark money makes it to the list of the next mayor’s priorities. But now, potential donors to dark money organizations trying to influence this vital election from the shadows should put the good of the city before their own fears of being named, and give directly to their candidate or to a fully disclosable independent campaign entity.
Let’s have an honest and open rest of the Cleveland mayoral campaign. The city will be better for it. As in the “Wizard of Oz,” pay attention, voters. If someone lurks behind the curtains, do not let them prevail.
Joe Roman retired earlier this year as CEO of the Greater Cleveland Partnership.
Have something to say about this topic?
* Send a letter to the editor, which will be considered for print publication.
* Email general questions about our editorial board or comments or corrections on this opinion column to Elizabeth Sullivan, director of opinion, at esullivan@cleveland.com.
"Stop" - Google News
October 10, 2021 at 04:26PM
https://ift.tt/3DtbSlm
Let’s stop dark money in Cleveland elections - right now: Joe Roman - cleveland.com
"Stop" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KQiYae
https://ift.tt/2WhNuz0
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Let’s stop dark money in Cleveland elections - right now: Joe Roman - cleveland.com"
Post a Comment