This is quite a time to be talking about money in politics. But not just because of the cavalcade of Congressional con-men parading before our screens of late. This week, my home state of Connecticut is on the verge of an unprecedented reform of how state and legislative elections are financed. How we got to this point is a story worth exploring, with many lessons for how we move the national reform fight forward as well.

Hello TPM Café habitués,

This is quite a time to be talking about money and politics. Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Michael Scanlon, Bob Ney, "Duke" Cunningham...who's next?  At the national level, we are seeing the most outrageous string of pay-to-play scandals in a generation. At the same time, the campaign money chase is only accelerating--which means, inevitably, more scandals unless we change the rules of the game. Unfortunately, in Congress, no one is focusing on the kinds of reforms that would shift power away from well-heeled lobbying interests, placing greater clout in the hands of ordinary voters.

Progressives have been wrestling with this problem for a long time. And while what is happening in Washington seems to be getting worse, the good news is that out in the states, a different way of campaigning has been taking hold, one that attacks the problem of money in politics at its source. I direct Public Campaign, the national organization which for nine years has been the organizing center for a wave of state-based campaign finance reform that has put publicly-financed elections (sometimes called "Clean Elections") in place in six states--Arizona, New Mexico, North Carolina, Maine, New Jersey, Vermont--as well as in Portland, Oregon, and Albuquerque, New Mexico. (We also won in Massachusetts, but conservative incumbents in the legislature refused to fund the system.)

In those places, candidates for public office--executive, legislative and in some cases  judicial--have the option of running on a limited and equal grant of full public funding, provided they take little or no private contributions. To qualify they have to raise a large number of small (typically $5) contributions from voters in their district. And if a non-participating candidate tries to outspend them, they get some additional matching funds. Same if they are targeted by independent expenditures.

I'm not saying such a system would do away with all political mischief by big donors; if someone told you they could legislate away venality you would properly laugh them out the door. But this system gives candidates who do want to run without being dependent on wealthy donors a way to put forward a viable bid for office, and the results in the states that are furthest along in implementing this system are showing steady changes, including more contested races, a greater diversity of candidates, and a sizable number of office-holders of all political stripes who are demonstrably more independent of the usual sweet-talk of well-heeled lobbyists.

This is an especially good week to be talking about Clean Elections reform because we are on the verge of a dramatic new victory in my home state of Connecticut, where the legislature is about to take up a measure that would raise the bar for what we expect from lawmakers everywhere when they act on reform--they are going to change the rules for their own offices!

In Arizona and Maine, the two states that have Clean Elections in place for all statewide and legislative offices, the law was passed when citizens went to the initiative process to enact reform. The other states that have adopted the Clean system, have done so through the legislative process. Lawmakers have been far more cautious about extending public financing to their own offices, preferring instead that a financially level playing field be extended to judges (North Carolina), elected corporate regulators (New Mexico) or a handful of districts in a pilot project (New Jersey) or the governor's and lieutenant governor's seats (Vermont). But Connecticut may change that public financing equation.

This Monday afternoon, Democratic legislative leaders, flanked by the state's leading reform organizations, unveiled a reform measure they will offer to the legislature as a whole on Wednesday, after months of behind-the-scenes negotiations complemented by an intense grassroots lobby campaign. Democrats make up two-thirds of the members in each legislative chamber, but with some Ds refusing to go forward with reform, the bill will not become law if Republican Governor Jodi Rell employs her veto pen. However, she's been a catalyst, prodding the Democrats every step of the way to place a bill on her desk. (Yes, you read that correctly--a Republican Governor is pushing for full public financing of elections!)

Governor Rell has insisted that any public financing measure include all state offices (earlier versions of the law had applied only to statewide posts) and also severely restrict lobbyist campaign contributions, political donations from state contractors, and the state's PACs. Her gumption has not only supplied Democrats greater incentive for sweeping reform, but served to separate her from her corrupt GOP predecessor, former Governor John Rowland, presently doing time in federal prison (along with two big city mayors, the state treasurer and a state senator who is awaiting sentencing). Rowland had vetoed a public financing bill in 2000, before raising record amount of money for his successful 2002 gubernatorial campaign.

We'll know soon whether Connecticut will meet the public's desire for reform. It will be an interesting ride these next few days with lessons worth examining as we think about national change from a campaign finance system that encourages corruption to one that expands power for voters and gives fresh faces a chance at a competitive run for office. I'm hoping to cover how we managed to get to this point in Connecticut, while reform inside the Beltway has gone a different direction. And I'm hoping to hear from you about what you're seeing happen in your own states and localities.

More as it happens.... - Nick

Nick Nyhart is a co-founder and the present Executive Director of Public Campaign, an eight- year-old national organization dedicated to winning comprehensive "Clean Money" campaign finance reform.