Tuesday, August 11, 2009

James Wu Fires Back

世界日報8月11日針對有媒體報導20選區市議員周燕霞呼籲所有拿到相對基金(matchingfunds)的參選人將錢捐給社區的說法,華裔選民聯盟總顧問李瑞生10日表示,相對基金的錢按照法律規定只能用於選舉,如果用在其它方面,不僅錢會被收回,更會受到紐約市選舉財務委員會(NewYork City Campaign Finance Board)的處罰。
World Journal

August 11

In response to Yen Chou's press conference, which demands all the candidates return the matching fund they've got from the City,Chinese American Voters Association General Counsel Johnson Lee said,according to law matching fund can only be used on campaign expenses.If not, the Campaign Finance Board would not only take the money back,but fine the candidate.

However, Yen Chou's campaign responded, they just emphasized candidates should raise their own money and return the matching fundto the City for the use of community establishments.

Johnson Lee pointed out, matching fund is designed to give opportunities to candidates who are not able to raise much money. In fact, after the City started providing matching fund, the number of candidates has increased tremendously. Thus, voters have gotten more choices and the rich special interest groups can no longer monopolizethe elections. Moreover, according to the law, the application and usage of matching money is strict and the matching funds can only be used for campaign purposes.

Otherwise the candidates would be punished. James Wu said, choosing to enroll in the matching fund program proves that his resourse and usage of campaign finance can stand the test.

Choosing to enrolled in matching fund program is not only for more transparacy and responsibility of elected officials, but good goverment and democratic system. This has nothing to do with wasting taxpayers'money.


  1. the translation sucks....

  2. We are trying our best as a volunteer organization to provide a service to the community. If you don't like what we provide here on this blog feel free to look elsewhere. We guarantee that this site is for the greater flushing area and its residents and will have the best information regarding our neighborhood in both English and Chinese.

  3. I think the translation is ok. Thanks for the blog's effort.


    The New York City campaign finance system was amended in 2007 from a voluntary program into a mandatory regulatory scheme that is applicable to all candidates. Because the requirements of the law can no longer be avoided, the law is in conflict with provisions of state law that govern local elections. A United States Supreme Court decision, Davis v. FEC, handed down in June of 2008 has further undermined the validity of the New York City campaign finance system. The decision held that asymmetrical contribution limits applicable to candidates based on the candidate’s use of their own wealth violate the First Amendment.
    Also the problem with the new mandate is the fact that many endorsed candidates use resources that are not available to other candidates and also do not report them. Even though Campaign Finance rules are currently the LAW as you say, but for a person to raise only $15,000 or $20,000 and then receive over $100,000 of taxpayer money is a problem. Especially when you are running for an office claiming to be supported by the people. If that were true then your ability to raise funds from the community would not be a problem. Then most of you money rasied would be from the community and not from outside the community. If the system were set up as it is currently for non-participants (having to abide by all the rules as if they were receiving matching funds) and everyone was mandated to raise money only from their community then we could WEED OUT those who run on false pretenses. LIKE YOU MR. JAMES WU....

  5. Good to know at least some people know what matching funds for.

  6. Matching Funds makes sense, the key word here is MATCHING. The idea that a candidate can receive six times as much as he raises from the city to subsidize his campaign is absolutely ludicrous. If a candidate does not have the support among the community to raise even 100,000 dollars, how can he expect the city to come up with that money? By leveraging fundraising, even the weakest of campaigns can receive up to six times as much as they raised themselves from the City. This should not be called "matching funds" but rather "leveraged funds".

    With the City of New York facing one of its worst budget crisis in over 30 years, only someone truly shameless would ask for 100k dollars to "match" his own meager support of 20k dollars. If James Wu needs money so badly, why is he wasting it filing frivolous lawsuits that impugne the dignity of the elderly in Flushing? If he's using this 100k to support his public campaign, why have signs only RECENTLY gone up on Main St. in Flushing, and without even a picture? It's not like if he had put up signs weeks ago that they would suddenly disappear before the primary! The Wu campaign has been a disappointment, the only worse disappointment is that we are the ones paying for it.

  7. can someone explain why Chou donated $8,250 to herself?

  8. I guess she was planning to take the matching fund.