• Home
• Voting & Democracy
  • Go Vote
  • N.C. Voter Guide
  • VoterRadio.com
• Research & Publications
  • Follow the Money
  • NCCVE Research
• Multimedia
  • The Voter Update Podcast
• For the Media
  • News Releases
  • Media Advisories
  • Contact NCCVE
• About Us
  • Board of Directors
  • Staff
  • Contribute to NCCVE
  • Contact Us
• Search

Apr. 9, 2001

Fact Sheet: N.C. Voters Support Campaign Reform

North Carolinians are cynical and concerned about the influence of money in the political process.

More than nine in ten -- 91 percent of respondents -- think that campaign contributors have a definite impact on the public policy decisions their elected officials make. Only 7 percent of people think that such contributors do not affect their elected officials. On a similar test of public perception, an overwhelming majority of 72 percent feels that candidates for public office spend more time raising money for their campaigns than they do solving the problems of average North Carolinians.

McCain-Feingold soft money restrictions are strongly favored across the state.

Soft money, which is raised in unlimited amounts by political parties from wealthy individuals, businesses and labor unions, is dangerous to democracy because it drowns out the voices of average citizens, because it gives clout to big-dollar contributors from outside North Carolina, and because it is difficult if not impossible to trace who is giving how much to whom. These dangers are so evident to North Carolinians that nearly three in four (72 percent) would like to see McCain-Feingold style legislation adopted.

The public wants to see action on campaign finance reform in North Carolina before the next election.

Sixty-two percent of respondents feel that the influence of large campaign contributions makes campaign finance reform a key issue the Governor and the legislature need to address immediately, while only 36 percent feel the issue should be sidelined until other more pressing problems are dealt with.

There is strong support for public financing and spending limits in North Carolina.

A full 60 percent of respondents would like to see a voluntary system of public funding enacted if participating candidates agree to spending limits. Only 37 percent oppose the idea. The support for public funding extends across party lines. Among Democrats and Independents, 64 percent favor the proposal; among Republicans, 56 percent like the idea.

Voters would rather see candidates using tax dollars than special interest dollars in their campaigns.

If the only difference between two candidates for public office was that one used taxpayer money to fund his or her campaign and the other was using special interest money, more people (47 percent) would vote for the candidate using taxpayer money than for the candidate using special interest money (35 percent).

Support for four-year terms for legislators grows dramatically if four-year terms and public funding are packaged together as one reform.

Opponents of four-year terms were asked if they would change their minds -- that is, would they support a move from two to four year terms for legislators -- if legislators were to simultaneously enact a public funding system. Whereas support for four-year terms was found to be 58 percent initially, it rose to 77 percent after opponents were given the chance to change their minds if the reforms were packaged together.

Survey conducted March 27-29, 2001.

N=600 likely voters. Margin of error +/- 4 percent.

Data collection and analysis by Public Opinion Strategies.