Well That's One Way To Look At It
The Times, on Election Eve, had this editorial. Their take is that yes, there is a few big-money donors to some campaigns but that's because we're the biggest district in the state. Oh and thanks for explaining that to us because it had been quite a mystery.
"Contrasted with two years ago when a $4,500 campaign contribution represented a high mark, the $5,000 and $10,000 checks written this year to unseat two incumbents and elect two others stand out. But a scroll through the Washington Public Disclosure Commission's Web site reveals how much people care about the schools. A few big checks are heavily outweighed by hundreds of contributions in the $10, $25 and $50 range from people with a vested interest in the city schools.
"Contrasted with two years ago when a $4,500 campaign contribution represented a high mark, the $5,000 and $10,000 checks written this year to unseat two incumbents and elect two others stand out. But a scroll through the Washington Public Disclosure Commission's Web site reveals how much people care about the schools. A few big checks are heavily outweighed by hundreds of contributions in the $10, $25 and $50 range from people with a vested interest in the city schools.
Money can signal the intrusion of special interests into politics. There are no contribution limits for School Board races. But there's nothing alarming, here. The $500,000 raised so far by seven candidates vying for four board seats is a mark of Seattle's stature as the largest district in the state and one central to the health of this region."
There's nothing alarming here. Just a few people giving a lot of money to a district they care about. Now. Not 4 years ago or 3 years ago.
But it's pretty much out of anyone's hands now but the voters. It will be interesting to see a new Board (how new is anyone's guess) in action especially with a shift to a possible majority male Board.
Comments