Massachusetts Taxpayer Funding for Political Campaigns Advisory, Question 3 (2002)
Elections and Campaigns
|Not on ballot|
The Massachusetts Taxpayer Funding for Political Campaigns Advisory Question, also known as Question 3, on the November 5, 2002 ballot in Massachusetts as a non-binding legislative referral advisory question. It was defeated.
It sought to determine whether the people of Massachusetts favored or opposed taxpayer money being used to fund political campaigns for public office. As a non-binding advisory question, the voting results did serve only to advise legislators and did not establish a law, repeal a law or bind the legislature.
|Question 3 (Taxpayer Funding for Political Campaigns)|
Official results via: The Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth Elections Division
Text of measure
The official summary for Question 3 was:
The Legislature has placed this question on the ballot in order to determine whether the people favor or oppose taxpayer money being used to fund political campaign for public office in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The vote on this question is advisory and does not establish a law, repeal a law, or bind the legislature.
A yes vote would advise that the voters favor taxpayer money being used to fund political campaigns for public office in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
The full text of the legislation proposed by the question is available here.
|historical ballot measure article requires the text of the measure to be added to the page.|
The initiative was supported by Common Cause for Massachusetts, a nonpartisan citizen's organization working for open government. They argued that the initiative was a deceptively worded attempt to repeal the Clean Elections Law by showing that Massachusetts voters disapprove of taxpayer money funding political campaigns. The organization argued that the Clean Elections Law increased competition for public office and reduced corporate special interest money in campaigns by providing a limited amount of public financing for candidates who accept strict campaign spending and contribution limits. The organization claimed that the initiative was an attempt by incumbent legislators to avoid having to compete for their jobs.
The initiative was opposed by the Honorable Francis J. Larkin, who claimed that taxpayer funding of political campaigns is a wasteful use of limited public funds. He claimed that such funding could cost taxpayers over $100 million per four-year election cycle, and that there were no safeguards in place to prevent fraud and misuse of taxpayer money. He argued that taxpayers should not be forced to pay for the campaigns of politicians they don't necessarily support or endorse.
- List of Massachusetts ballot measures
- Procedures for qualifying an initiative in Massachusetts
- Campaign finance requirements for Massachusetts ballot measures
- 2002 ballot measures
- Massachusetts 2002 ballot measures
- Petition drive deadlines in 2008
- Massachusetts signature requirements
- Information for Voters 2002 - Ballot Question 3 (Non-Binding) Secretary of State elections archive
- Elections: Massachusetts 2002 Statewide Ballot Measures (PDF) Secretary of State record
State of Massachusetts
|State executive officers||
Governor | Lieutenant Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Treasurer | State Auditor | Commissioner of Education | Commissioner of Insurance | Commissioner of Agriculture | Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs | Secretary of Labor and Workforce Development | Chair of Public Utilities |
<ref> tags exist, but no
<references/> tag was found