Shot At on the High Ground

Los Angeles City Councilman Mike Feuer is drawing the animus of some of his colleagues for having dared to oppose their effort to get around the political spending limits written into law by voters in last November’s election. A council majority has supported putting a measure on the April ballot that would return the spending limit on so-called officeholder accounts to $75,000 a year, the limit that existed before the figure was reduced to $10,000 by Proposition 208.

Feuer sees this as an effort to undercut the political reforms the public so broadly supports. He’s right, but being right is proving to be no shield against abuse and insults from some of his colleagues.

The officeholder accounts that many on the council so cherish are used to pay for personal travel, entertainment of constituents and campaign contributors and printing of political literature. Funding for them comes from lobbyists and others who have a vested interest in doing favors for council members. Defenders of the accounts insist they are necessary for the proper conduct of business related to the public interest. That is transparent nonsense. Officeholder accounts are little more than a reelection slush fund for incumbents. They are self-aggrandizing, a way of currying favor and paying political debts. Any public benefit that might accrue from them is coincidental.

Proposition 208 represented a long-needed move to take out of the political process some of the distorting and corrupting effects of money, specifically by limiting campaign contributions and setting certain spending limits. The council’s effort to sabotage one of its provisions shows only contempt for public opinion. Feuer did the right thing in opposing that effort, and he should continue to stick to his principles.