AUGUSTA – Clean elections “are here to stay,” said Alison Smith of Maine Citizens for Clean Elections.

More than a third of the legislators elected Nov. 7, 2000, used the Maine Clean Elections Act to finance their campaigns, according to a report issued by MCCE. The first public funding of Maine election campaigns was rated “a great success,” possibly the best in the country from a political, logistical and administrative point of view, according to Smith.

“Clean” Maine legislators have traveled to North Carolina, South Carolina, Minnesota and Idaho to explain the Maine system. Only four other states have systems as complex as Maine’s, but none works as well, Smith said. She said it was fair to say that Maine has “the best system in the nation.”

Slightly more than half (62 of 116) of “clean” candidates won their races. The clean election system now has a built-in lobby with 38 Democrats, 6 Republicans and an independent member in the House, plus 10 Democrats and 7 Republicans in the Senate. More than 10,000 state residents made $5 contributions to clean elections candidates.

The numbers can only go up in the next election, judging by the interest in the program, Smith said. “I think it went so well that there will be more interest. The candidates which were elected are such great salespeople that we expect more candidates next time. Many people were afraid to be ‘guinea pigs’ in the first election.”

The impact of the new public funding program became evident in the primary when the number of candidates increased by 40 percent over 1998. More women than men chose to go “clean” in their elections and women did better than the privately funded candidates on Election Day, the report stated.

According to research conducted by the nonpartisan National Institute on Money in State Politics, spending in Maine legislative races was down 18 percent from the 1998 races, private donations were cut in half and the disparity of funding between winners and losers leveled off “significantly.”

In the MCCE poll, 97 percent of clean election candidates said they would use the system for their next election. Most candidates (55 percent) polled said they chose the clean elections funding system to support campaign reform, while 31 percent said the reason was eliminating time spent on fund raising. Another 21 percent said they chose to go “clean” because of fear of “corruption” by special interest groups.

Many candidates contacted in the survey expressed concern about the last-minute independent spending on negative ads, which should be controlled by future legislation.

In order to qualify for clean elections funding, candidates must collect $5 contributions from supporters. House races require 50 contributions of $5 and Senate races require 150 $5 contributions.

Once qualified, House candidates are eligible for $511 in an uncontested primary, $1,141 in a contested primary and $3,252 in a contested general election. Qualified Senate candidates are eligible for $1,785 for an uncontested primary, $4,334 for a contested primary and $12,910 for a contested general election. For “clean” candidates outspent by opponents, more funds are available, up to twice the regular allotment.

The fund that supports the system comes from annual $2 million appropriations from the general fund, the voluntary $3 tax checkoff that raises $250,000 and the qualifying funds raised by candidates, which raised about $50,000 in 2000.

MCCE comprises a number of organizations, including the League of Women Voters of Maine, Maine Common Cause, union groups, Natural Resources Council of Maine, Maine People’s Alliance, Maine Women’s Lobby, Maine Council of Churches, Peace Action Maine and Dirigo Alliance.