WARDSBORO — I have known John Moran for 28 years, and we have been married for 25.
His commitment on behalf of our district is exceptional. He is always available whether in Montpelier or at home to attend to community, group, or individual matters. He takes direct responsibility in his re-election efforts without reliance on a campaign manager or a treasurer because his service as a legislator is without staff.
Thus, while in session, he is accountable directly to constituents: reading hundreds of bills, working on legislation in his committee, testifying to other committees in the House or Senate, and making presentations on the House floor.
John always takes a stand on every matter that comes to a vote, regardless of party affiliation, in the best interest of our district. His actions as our legislator are knowledgeable and thoughtful. When under pressure, as sometimes happens on the House floor, he is persistent, patient, and positive.
My reason for writing is prompted by one of his opponent's statements crafted to cast doubt. In a Sept. 23 press release, Laura Sibilia claims to be “the only candidate to have filed statutorily required campaign finance reports.”
The law clearly states that these documents, filed electronically at intervals set by the Secretary of State, are not necessary for candidates who have not raised or spent over $500. John has reported all campaign financing, even when not required by law to do so.
Before reaching the $500 threshold, he checked the “no activity to report” category. After reaching the threshold, John has and will continue to report all contributions and expenses accrued.
All of his reports have complied with the law by being filed on time. His opponent, however, prides herself on campaign finance transparency, but neglects to mention that two of her reports were filed late. Both late filings were verified by the Secretary of State.
Campaign finance reform is a priority for John; he has and will continue to support legislation to get big money out of politics. Those who contribute to his campaign do so for one of three reasons: They support the positions he takes, they don't necessarily support his stand but know that he is open-minded and will listen to all sides, or they are groups who support their members in his district.
When John does not accept a campaign contribution, he does so discreetly. It seems to him somewhat insensitive for a candidate to publicly reject a good-faith offer of support.
While Laura Sibilia voices disdain for some of John's campaign contributions, in her Oct. 2 campaign filing she reports accepting $2,400 from seven donors outside our district and $2,000 from five within. How many hard-working Vermonters in our district can afford to make such donations?
I hope we can all agree that in January one of our legislative priorities will be to continue campaign finance reform so that money will not be the final word in elections. For now, let this campaign focus on the issues.