Backers of the state’s political public funding laws celebrated the Supreme Court’s upholding a lower court decision that Prop. 106 violates the Arizona Constitution and should not appear on the November ballot.

About 150 people attended the Aug. 17 rally at Grace Lutheran Church, 1124 N. Third St.

Rep. Steve Gallardo, D-13, set the tone for the evening. The good news was that “we won and the bad guys lost.” The bad news is that “the bad guys will be back,” he said, referring to statements by the organizers of Prop. 106 that they will continue their efforts to change the law that established public funding for legislative and state elections.

Wes Gullett, president of the Clean Elections Institute, thanked the groups and individuals that had united to oppose Prop. 106. He said the number of allied organizations had grown to more than 100 and that if the campaign had continued, the Institute would have had to find larger space for their “allies meeting” and it would have been the third change of venue.

Paul Eckstein, senior partner in Perkins Coie Brown & Bain, the law firm that represented the Institute in court and won the case that resulted in Prop. 106 being removed from the ballot, said that his firm (then known as Brown & Bain) was proud to have been instrumental in getting Clean Elections on the ballot in 1998. He was also proud that the first lawsuit filed by the firm after merging with Perkins Coie “resulted in the death of Prop. 106.” He noted that this was the seventh legal challenge to public funding laws and the seventh victory.

Attorney Mike Valder said there are surely more challenges to come. Opponents of public funding for elections might try to have the next Legislature refer unfriendly amendments to the 2006 ballot, he said. Failing that, he said opponents would be back with petitions in 2006 to pursue the initiative route again.

Mr. Valder urged supporters to remain united and to place the Institute on their list of “charities” to which they contribute regularly. “The other side believes that a candidate’s viability is measured by how much money they can raise. They will continue to mount very well-funded campaigns against us, and we will need a substantial war chest to protect clean elections,” he said.

Mr. Valder also acknowledged that there are imperfections in the current law. He said that the Institute would join with the Citizens Clean Elections Commission to pursue a legislative fix along the lines of those proposed last session by Rep. Steve Tully, R-11, in H2227, and Sen. Jim Waring, R-7 in S1331. A principal provision of those measures was one that would reduce the number of campaign finance reports that privately funded candidates would have to file if they had no publicly funded opponents.

Mr. Tully’s bill was never referred to a committee, and Mr. Waring’s was assigned to the Judiciary Committee but was never heard. A three-quarters majority vote in each house would be necessary to amend clean elections law because it was enacted via a voter initiative.

The final speaker was Attorney General Terry Goddard. He said he and his predecessor, Governor Napolitano, each had vigorously defended court challenges to the public funding process. Currently, his office is defending a suit filed Jan. 29 by the Institute for Justice in U.S. District Court, alleging that the system presents such an onerous burden on privately funded candidates that it amounts to an infringement of the right to free speech.

Mr. Goddard summarized the evening: “This is very different from every other victory celebration I have ever attended. It’s in August, three months before the election. There is no beer. And the leaders are still asking for money.” —