There are a number of issues highlighted in the statement: (I) recent corruption scandals in Washington D.C. would be unaffected by the existence of a tax-financing program; (II) New York City’s matching funds program is fraught with corruption; (III) similar programs in Arizona and Maine have also experienced much corruption; (IV) a recent academic study found no evidence that these programs decrease the incidence of public corruption; (V) an analysis of Connecticut’s taxpayer financing program has demonstrated its failure to change legislative voting patterns; (VI) existing statewide programs have done little to diminish alleged “interest group” influence; (VII) most other claims by advocates of “clean elections” have been shown to be false; and (VIII) the cost of such a citywide program in Washington D.C. is likely to be expensive and rise in cost over time.

Read full testimony here.