Arizona’s Clean Elections system began with a voter-approved initiative in 1998. Its purpose was to reduce candidates’ dependence on large donors and restore confidence in state government. Voters reasonably expect candidates who participate in the system to operate independently of powerful corporate interests. In this year’s State Mine Inspector race, however, campaign-finance records and public reporting raise serious questions about whether mining-industry influence has found a way into a publicly financed campaign.
Appointed State Mine Inspector Les Presmyk is running as a Clean Elections candidate. Although Clean Elections candidates are prohibited from accepting corporate donations, the system permits certain individual contributions, including what are sometimes described as “seed” donations. Following the Clean Elections State Mine Inspector debate, KJZZ reporter Camryn Sanchez reported that Presmyk had accepted donations from Nicholas Matiella, director of federal and state partnerships for Resolution Copper, and Harold Loyer, senior vice president of projects for Arizona Sonoran Copper Company. According to campaign-finance information reported by See the Money, Presmyk also received $220 contributions from at least 36 mine owners, executives, lobbyists, and others whose work could be affected by the State Mine Inspector’s Office. Ten of those donors were reported to have out-of-state corporate connections. These contributions may not violate the law, but their concentration raises a reasonable question about how the donors became involved and what influence, if any, they expect in return.
That question matters because Presmyk has described his number one goal as State Mine Inspector as being an “Ambassador for the Mine Industry.” The office’s central responsibility is public safety. The elected inspector must protect mine workers and help safeguard the public from abandoned mines. The person responsible for enforcing safety standards should be viewed first as an independent public official, not as an ambassador for the industry whose operations the office oversees. The concern is not that the mining industry should have no voice, but that public confidence depends on clear independence from regulated interests.
The reported donations also warrant scrutiny because small contributions can have a much larger effect when they help unlock public financing. The combined contributions reportedly supported the hiring of Shipley Strategies, a Republican campaign consulting firm. Shipley Strategies obtained the nominating-petition signatures required to place Presmyk on the ballot and helped secure the 500 qualifying donations needed to receive approximately $73,000 in Clean Elections primary funding. A $220 contribution may appear modest on its own, but contributions connected to mining interests can carry significant weight when they help a campaign qualify for tens of thousands of dollars in public funds. That outcome appears inconsistent with the voter-approved purpose of reducing the influence of large donors.
I ask Les Presmyk to publicly disclose the full role that these donors and Shipley Strategies played in his campaign, including how the fundraising and qualifying-donation effort was organized, and to explain how he will remain independent of the mining interests his office regulates. I also ask the Clean Elections Commission to review whether this fundraising activity is consistent with the purpose of Arizona’s public-financing system and to make its findings available to the public. Before deciding who can be trusted to put mine-worker and public safety first, voters should examine Presmyk’s contributions and stated priorities carefully. Clear answers are necessary to protect confidence in Clean Elections and in the office of State Mine Inspector
SJHarshman
