www.CAcleanAction.org

Board Member Jerome E. Horton scored 100% on the Clean Money questionnaire

His opponent, G. Rick Marshall, scored 20%.

They are running for Board of Equalization District 3.

The California Clean Money Action Fund asked all candidates for state office in California to answer six questions about whether they support legislation for more disclosure on political ads and public financing of campaigns.

Overall Score.

Board Member Jerome E. Horton (D) G. Rick Marshall (R)
Overall Score: 100% Overall Score: 20%

The overall score on the survey is determined by the answers on the first five questions. For every “Yes”, the candidate gets 20%, for every “No” they get 0%. An answer of “Other” gets 10% unless it’s clear from their explanation that the candidate would or would not support the legislation.

Q1. Do you support legislation requiring ballot measure ads to clearly state their three largest true individual, corporate or union funders instead of committee names, even if the funds are transferred through one or more intermediary committees or organizations?
Board Member Jerome E. Horton (D) G. Rick Marshall (R)
Answer: "Yes"
Answer: "Other"*

"The law already requires that largest funder to be named. What is gained by adding the other two? Why stop at three? I do not see the value in this requirement other than additional requirements to exercise their free speech."

* Explanation shows no support for the legislation.

Q2. Do you support legislation requiring independent ads for and against candidates to clearly state their three largest true individual, corporate or union funders instead of committee names, even if the funds are transferred through one or more intermediary committees or organizations?
Board Member Jerome E. Horton (D) G. Rick Marshall (R)
Answer: "Yes"
Answer: "Other"*

"The law already requires that largest funder to be named. What is gained by adding the other two? Why stop at three? I do not see the value in this requirement other than additional requirements to exercise their free speech."

* Explanation shows no support for the legislation.

Q3. Would you support legislation described in questions 1 and 2 if your constituents were clearly in favor of it while major campaign funders opposed it?
Board Member Jerome E. Horton (D) G. Rick Marshall (R)
Answer: "Yes"
Answer: "Yes"
Q4. Do you support legislation requiring state and local candidates to stand by their political ads, saying in those ads that they “approve this message” as federal candidates must?
Board Member Jerome E. Horton (D) G. Rick Marshall (R)
Answer: "Yes"
Answer: "No"

"Again, what is the purpose? Voters already know the ad is coming from the candidate."

Q5. Do you support legislation providing competitive amounts of public financing or small donor matching funds to campaigns of qualified candidates who demonstrate a broad base of public support and abide by strict spending limits?
Board Member Jerome E. Horton (D) G. Rick Marshall (R)
Answer: "Yes"
Answer: "No"

"I believe the candidate must meet certain qualification for the office."

"This lets the government choose winners and losers not the people."

Q6. Would you support a system of public financing of campaigns as in question 5 that covers all state races, including Assembly, State Senate, and statewide offices, if it were funded by an annual tax or fee of no more than $8 per California resident? *
Board Member Jerome E. Horton (D) G. Rick Marshall (R)
Answer: "Yes"
Answer: "No"

"This is a hidden tax. The federal checkoff is no longer working as candidates are ignoring spending limits. Again, the government would be in control of speech, deciding which ideas can and cannot be heard. $8 is a nice starting point but it won't stay there."

* The wording of this question created some confusion about its intent. The intent was to ask about funding of public campaign finance for state offices with a tax or fee that averaged $8 per person, an investment in the integrity of our elections that is less than one-third of 1% of California's General Fund this year. However some candidates responded to the question as if it were proposing an additional flat tax of $8 to be paid by every Californian. Due to the confusion the wording of this question created, its answers were not scored and did not count towards the overall score for the Clean Money Survey.

Note: Candidate explanations are shown as submitted. CCMAF has not edited the candidate explanations for content or writing style.

California Clean Money Action Fund
3916 Sepulveda Blvd, Suite 208, Culver City, CA  90230.  United States.
Phone: (800) 566-3780.  Fax:(888) 633-8898.  info@CAcleanaction.org