Four election cycles have passed since Arizona voters passed the Clean Elections Act of 1998. Enforcing the statutes passed by the act has been time consuming. Many candidates have been forced to pay fines or reached agreements with the commission without admitting guilt to violating campaign finance laws.
The following candidates received the greatest penalties, and perhaps most interesting, for intentionally or unintentionally running afoul of the Clean Elections Act rules.
David Burnell Smith:
Overspent, gets ‘death penalty’
Original fine: $44,000
Reduced to: $2,500
It’s one thing for elected officials to get themselves into trouble and another to lose elections when voters begin to question their character. But there’s something to be said for making history, and Scottsdale/Carefree Rep. David Burnell Smith did just that when he became the first legislator in the nation to be removed from office for campaign finance violations.
When the Citizens Clean Elections Commission found the District 7 Republican had overspent his 2004 primary election limit by more than $6,000 and ordered him to leave office, the West Virginia native didn’t disappear quietly. Mr. Smith, a lawyer by trade, fought and lost every step of the way to the Arizona Supreme Court, which also denied his claim that the power to remove elected officials lies solely with citizen recall and impeachment by the Legislature.
The decision affirmed commission authority to sentence candidates who overspend by 10 percent or greater to the “death penalty,” leaving advocates of publicly funded campaigns overjoyed, and Mr. Smith in self-described financial and emotional ruins.
But the saga of the man who ran four previous unsuccessful campaigns before his election in 2004 was not over. He filed an additional challenge against the commission based on a U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down low contribution limits established in Vermont, and ran a competitive re-election campaign, this time with private funds.
After failing to qualify for the 2006 general election, he appeared before the CCEC asking for partial relief from the $44,000 in penalties levied against him for his earlier infractions. To his relief that wish was granted. On Oct. 25, the commission agreed to accept a fine of $2,500.
Libertarian team:
Bar tabs, car rentals
Original fines totaled: $26,970 each
Reduced to: $15,000 each
Usually car rentals, liquor and bar tabs don’t show up on campaign finance reports, but Yuri Downing-Garcia and associates Trevor Clevenger and Paul DeDonati introduced a novel campaign method in 2002.
The trio ran and subsequently lost as a Libertarian team for House and Senate seats for District 17, which covers south Scottsdale and most of Tempe, including Arizona State University.
The commission and staff were not swayed by Mr. Downing-Garcia’s claim that the “unconventional” campaigning in Scottsdale nightclubs such as Sanctuary, Six, and the Cat Eye Lounge was necessary to reach young voters. Colleen Connor, CCEC executive director at the time, noted most of the clubs were not even in their district and that little evidence of a political campaigning was ever discovered.
An indictment by the Attorney General’s Office alleges Mr. Downing-Garcia filed false campaign finance reports, converted as much as $5,000 of public campaign funds into hard cash, and paid himself $111 after the 2002 general election in order to drain his campaign account.
Mr. Downing-Garica, who also served as campaign treasurer for Mr. Clevenger and Mr. Donati, would later be indicted for theft, fraud and multiple counts of perjury. And while his accomplices would later individually settle with the commission for $15,000 (paid for by an anonymous source), Mr. Downing-Garcia skipped a sentencing hearing and was arrested days later by Salt River Police while driving with a loaded handgun and a forgery device.
After serving almost a month in jail, he failed to report to another sentencing hearing in May and a warrant was issued for his arrest. His whereabouts are still unknown.
Bill Montgomery: Blurring the lines between primary, general election spending
Fine: $43,000
Illegal immigration was certainly a hot campaign topic for all Arizona candidates in 2006, and Republican challenger for attorney general Bill Montgomery was no exception. The former tank commander and West Point graduate repeatedly charged during the campaign that incumbent Attorney General Terry Goddard had failed to take illegal immigration seriously — and that Arizona’s crime rate went through the roof as a result.
But Mr. Goddard’s campaign would have the last word in the immigration debate. On Sept. 22, a complaint was filed with the Citizens Clean Elections Commission alleging that Mr. Montgomery filmed a tough-on-illegal-immigration commercial late in the primary cycle that included authentic illegal immigrants.
Those charges are currently being investigated by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, and Mr. Montgomery has maintained he had no role in the hiring of actors for the commercial and that he believed the Hispanic men were volunteers.
The commission refused to rule on the alleged use of illegal immigrants but did believe that Mr. Montgomery’s campaign inappropriately used primary campaign funds for general campaign purposes.
The Republican candidate was permitted to use the commercial, which reportedly was filmed on primary election day due to scheduling difficulties, but the commission reached an agreement with Mr. Montgomery to accept $43,000 from his general campaign allotment as a repayment for funds spent with the intent to air the ad.