Mayoral candidate George McDonald scored a small win in court yesterday: For the time being, he can collect campaign donations that are legal under state law but exceed the $4,950-per-donor limit imposed by the city.
That’s great news for New Yorkers who are fed up with the city’s current class of politicians. For this case is about more than money in politics: It’s about laws that favor the established political class at the expense of credible challengers.
Because McDonald has opted out of the city’s matching-funds program, he argues he should be governed by the state’s finance laws. These laws allow campaign donations of up to $19,700 in the primaries and $41,100 in general elections.
Without access to these donations, McDonald simply can’t compete. An advocate for the homeless, he doesn’t have the money to self-finance. He isn’t bankrolled by a union, and, unlike lifelong politicians, he has no donor base built up by years of dishing out political favors.
It’s telling that a brief filed in court against McDonald came from state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who obviously has no personal objection to big donations. In his most recent six-month filing, we found more than 60 contributions that would exceed the city limits.
Indeed, Schneiderman has amassed a $2.8 million war chest, which suggests that his agenda here has little to do with keeping money out of New York elections.
Like so many others who want to extend the city’s narrower campaign-donation limits to the state, Schneiderman knows that it’s a good way of keeping first-time candidates like McDonald out of the running — and keeping entrenched pols in power.
As McDonald told The Post: “I’m planning on financing my campaign exactly as the attorney general does now. It hasn’t seemed to invite corruption as far as he’s concerned. It certainly won’t for me.”
We agree. Shouldn’t McDonald be allowed to run his campaign under the same rules as Schneiderman?