Review of Mainero v. Probolsky On TIN CUP 2: Part 2

This is a continuation of my previous post reviewing the Mainero v. Probolsky TIN CUP 2 debate on Rick Reiff's Inside OC.

Adam Probolsky criticized the proposed Campaign Fair Practices Commission, prompting this response from Moorlach Chief of Staff Mario Mainero:

"In terms of the staff part, all we are doing...in fact, we protect candidates because we literally state in the law, that the staff, the executive director, does what Shirley does right now, because no one else is enforcing it, and that is if she sees a potential violation like somebody is over by a few dollars, she calls them, says look, you need to return it, they return it, it's remedied, it's over."

Protecting candidates from what? Put it this way: if the County gave Shirley Grindle the power to issue subpoenas, compel testimony and levy fines, how safe do you think county candidates would feel?

Rick Reiff then poses the question of whether contribution limits have "cleaned up" government, to which Mario responds:

Mainero: In fact, there's empirical evidence that it actually has worked, in this sense. Although you point to two or three problems, for one, they aren't necessarily linked to campaign contributions But before TIN CUP, there were 43 indictments of Orange County elected officials on campaign related criminal violations.

Reiff: So we've had fewer.

Mario: Significantly fewer.

I'd wager the 43 indictments had a lot more to do with reducing official corruption than TIN CUP. We've had campaign contribution limits at the federal level for even longer than at the county level. Is there less corruption in federal government? Did the limits stop Duke Cunningham or William Jefferson?

This idea that contribution limits reduce corruption stems from a mistaken view of the source of official corruption, which has far more to do with the intersection of an officeholder's character and government's power to grant favors. If an officeholder has integrity, he or she isn't going to be bought no matter the size of the campaign contribution.

Adam Probolsky then points out the proposed Fair Campaign Practices Commission is deliberately designed to be composed of people who don't are ignorant and inexperienced regarding political campaigns.

In fact, we've depoliticized it. That's actually a very good point. We are de-politicizing it with a professional staff and with people who are not going to be sworn to go after people with a political agenda.

De-politicizing politics? Is that even possible? Is that something we want government to try and do? And are government workers somehow magically immune to possessing their own agendas?

More later...