Democracy Vouchers

Seattle, WA

Population: 500,000 - 1,000,000 | Government type: City | Topic: Expanding Representation in Government

Photo: The Seattle Times

The Program

In 2007, Washington State passed a law to repeal the prohibition of public financing, but the 2008 Great Recession drastically reduced local governments’ interest in spending funds on campaign financing. Several years of significant organizing efforts, coupled with a popular but unsuccessful 2013 ballot campaign, led to a 2015 Seattle voter-approved ten-year property tax to fund a democracy voucher program for city elections. The primary impetus of this program was to reduce the influence of large campaign contributions in local elections and to increase the influence of small-dollar contributions. The funding for the program is not permanent and needs to be reauthorized in 2025, but the city has flexibility in how it can fund it in the future.

 Each January, residents on the voter registration roll receive four vouchers, each worth $25, to contribute to one or more candidates of their choosing. Green card holders may participate, but they must complete paperwork to prove eligibility of both age and residency in the city. For 2021, the program has an overall funding limit of over $6 million, but the amount is constrained by the number of candidates who qualify to participate.  The program’s annual administrative costs vary in conjunction with the city’s election cycles. 

 When candidates opt into the voucher program, they are immediately limited in the amount of money they can raise. In order to qualify for the program, candidates must get a certain number of signatures and a certain number of $10 contributions from individuals residing in the city. 

The number of qualifying signatures and qualifying contributions varies depending on the office. For example, city council district candidates must collect 150 qualifying signatures and 150 qualifying contributions of at least $10 from each of those individuals; a minimum of half must be from their district and half can be from anywhere else in the city. City wide, candidates need a total of 400 signatures and $100 in contributions. However, candidates have found it challenging to circulate information about the vouchers that can ensure their use, as people tend to ignore official-looking mail. In response to this obstacle, candidates have started pre-contacting voters with visuals that show them what to look for in the mail. In addition, the city launched several media campaigns to notify residents before vouchers were mailed. In 2019, eight percent of voucher holders used their vouchers, up from four percent in 2017 and the 1–2 percent for contributions in 2015 before the voucher system was initiated.

In 2019, district candidates could raise $150,000 for the primary and general elections respectively. Similarly, city-wide council candidates could  raise up to $375,000 for both the primary and general elections. The initiative’s authors generated the campaign limits by reviewing average spending amounts. The program is designed to make sure that candidates can participate or respond to massive spending of self-financed or corporate interest candidates.  However, if a candidate’s opponent is not in the program, and this opponent spends over the limit, program candidates may appeal to the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission to be released from the limit. Residents can contribute an additional $200 in cash on top of the vouchers for a total of $300, however there is a $550 individual contribution limit for candidates who are not taking part in the voucher system.

Candidates are encouraged to qualify as early as possible to collect the voucher money. Candidates may even begin qualifying the year prior to an election so they are prepared to collect funding as soon as vouchers are distributed the following year in mid-February.* There has been plenty of funding available because it takes significant effort to qualify and relatively few candidates make it. While it is possible to raise all the money required to run a campaign through vouchers, this rarely happens. Candidates should prioritize that goal because, for instance, district candidates can only raise $150,000 total. This means that for what they raise in cash, candidates need to accept less in vouchers.  For example, if a candidate raises $50,000 in cash, they can only accept up to $100,000 in vouchers.  Candidates must also return any money they do not use at the end of the election cycle.

With regard to how voucher donations are made, voters can submit their vouchers in pre-paid envelopes to the campaign or directly to the city. The city validates vouchers by confirming the resident’s signature and then sends checks directly to the campaign. Each voucher is assigned a unique ID number, which is useful if vouchers need to be replaced and to ensure that no duplicate vouchers are submitted.  There is an average 2–3 week processing time for voucher transactions.

One challenge for campaigns is that contributors of over $100 are required to divulge their employer and occupation to the campaigns to which they contribute. During the qualifying process, candidates are largely collecting $10 contributions. Unfortunately, when the contributor later turned in their $100 in vouchers for a candidate (as many did), the campaign had no easy way to collect the employer and occupation information that they were required to report. Campaigns now collect employer and occupation information from these qualifying contributors. With each payout of vouchers, the SEEC now provides each campaign with a data file of contributors whose vouchers have been redeemed in that payout. The data file includes name, address, and voucher contribution amount. 

While it is more challenging for new candidates to qualify, it still offers an opportunity to run for office and increases the likelihood that incumbents will face new challengers.

Collaborative Governance

Although state law prohibited campaign finance programs for the better part of two decades, activists and advocates remained committed to the concept. In 2002, an organization known as Fix Democracy First launched an effort to overturn the statewide ban, ultimately resulting in the 2007 change in state law. As the economy began to recover, there was a significant amount of organizing to reinstate public financing in Seattle.

Former Seattle Councilmembers Nick Licata and Mike O’Brien led the effort to put Proposition 1 on the November 2013 ballot; the proposition proposed  a super match  program of 6:1 for contributions from city residents.  A small group of volunteers, with little by way of funds, ran this campaign with a large group of organizational support and it was widely endorsed by candidates across the county and local advocacy groups.  Although polling indicated about a 30 percent approval, the ballot initiative actually received 49.6 percent support—just .4 percent shy of the 50 required to pass. 

Public awareness posters about Democracy Vouchers in the 2019 election.

While there was significant community energy to relaunch the campaign in 2015, the council turned down the idea due to the 2013 loss. However, national funders and community advocates had a different plan. They began to shape a program around democracy vouchers, the first-ever in the country, because they believed that despite logistical challenges, the program was a much more compelling form of public financing.  A 2017 analysis by Every Vote found that the voucher contributions better reflected Seattle’s diverse population and the city as a whole.

The community wanted to ensure as much access as possible, so the legislation’s authors included language that included permanent residents, saying that “anybody who is eligible to make a donation under federal campaign finance law is eligible to request and give a voucher contribution.” Other provisions included disclosure requirements and spending limits.

Honest Elections Seattle formed as an organization to run the 2015 campaign. National funders helped hire consultants and a campaign manager to secure around 30,000 signatures for the ballot initiative (three percent of those who voted for mayor). Virtually no one was opposed, and the campaign received enough city-wide support to pass.

Emphasis on equity

A significant proportion of Seattle’s population is ineligible to vote. The voucher program intentionally allows green card holders to participate in this program, creating an avenue with which ordinary people can have influence over who represents them in city government.

The voucher program reduces the importance of “dialing for dollars” and soliciting campaign contributions from financial interests. Instead, it centers residents as the key figures in elections. The vouchers effectively give leverage to those who are less wealthy and financially well-connected who would otherwise not have the means to donate to campaigns. More people are able to engage in local races and their contributions have greater significance. The democracy voucher program allows low-income earners and people of color to contribute funds to their preferred candidates at an outsized rate. The result is that candidates who understand the needs and concerns of these communities, and who are invested in addressing the concerns and needs of these residents, have the resources needed to take part in city government.

Furthermore, the democracy voucher program has significantly increased the diversity of the candidate pool in local elections. The 2021 Seattle City Council is made up of more women and more people of color than at any time in its history. In fact the majority of current city council members are women of color and the two citywide representatives are both women of color. Teresa Mosqueda recently shared how important the voucher program was in her decision to run as a non-traditional candidate with student loans.

Representation matters. In 2019, Amazon spent over a million dollars trying to defeat three progressive city council members, all of whom used the voucher system and won their respective races. Seattle residents engaged in grassroots politics spoke up and ensured that their candidates prevailed over corporate interests.

Analysis

• Preemption: Localities have control over budgeting priorities, but may run into challenges in taxation authority.

• Local government dynamics: The Seattle City Council is increasingly diverse and progressive and the program supports candidates across the political spectrum, provided they choose to opt to participate.

• Policy impact: Since 2017, the program has helped increase voter turnout in local elections, diversify the make-up of the city council, and give residents a voice in opposition to large corporations who donate large sums of money to candidates better aligned to their interests.

*The date the vouchers are mailed out has changed and is no longer the first business day of the election year but no later than March 1 (the SEEC determines the exact date).

Last updated: January 26, 2021

If you’re interested in learning more, please contact info@localprogress.org

READY FOR MORE INSPIRATION? KEEP EXPLORING: