We are a little over 3 weeks away from primary election day, and the Hamilton County Commissioner Republican primary race has had a major development, courtesy of a news release issued by a Northern Indiana Democrat Party Chairman.  That may sound strange, but it has been a strange political year.

Here is the story as I can best piece it together from a variety of news sources.  Jason Critchlow, Democrat Party Chairman in St. Joseph County (South Bend), issued a news release the afternoon of April 6th, showing an e-mail exchange between Hamilton County Commissioner Mark Heirbrandt and St. Joseph County Commissioner Deb Fleming.

Here is how Indianapolis Business Journal (IBJ) reporter Lindsey Erdody described the e-mail documents released by Chritchlow:

“In the emails, Heirbrandt discusses Fleming’s campaign with her at the same time the company he works for was bidding on a St. Joseph County project.”

I won’t go into further detail.  If you want more, IBJ.com and IndyStar.com have plenty of details on the e-mails.

Although Democrat Critchlow called the content of those e-mails “troubling and at minimum gives an appearance of impropriety,” he did not file a complaint with election officials.

Heirbrandt told IBJ he could not comment because of employment agreements he has in place.  However, his campaign said in a statement this is a “ridiculous accusation” that was “a blatant attempt to mischaracterize the truth.”

In a statement to WSBT-TV in South Bend, Fleming said Democrats are “trying to make these emails come across a certain way that they’re not.”

Chris Sikich of the Indianapolis Star had Julia Vaughn of Common Cause, an advocacy group specializing in campaign finance, review the e-mail documents.  She describes the e-mail conversation as crass but no laws were broken, in her view.

“Clearly this illustrates how rampant pay to play is in local government,” Vaughn told the Star. “There is a very small universe of people who contribute to local campaigns, and way too often they are the same people doing business with local government. It just clouds decisions. They should be having these conversations separately.”

Mark Heirbrandt is one of 3 Hamilton County Commissioners, representing District 3, which includes the City of Fishers.  He is running for reelection, although he was originally placed in office to fill a vacancy through a Republican Party caucus.  Heirbrandt replaced Doug Carter, who was appointed to head the Indiana State Police by Governor Mike Pence.

Bill Smythe, a local Fishers restaurant owner, is running against Heirbrandt in the primary election.  Smythe’s campaign issued a news release April 8th saying this e-mail situation is “precisely why I got into this race in the first place.”

“I have confidence in the voters of Hamilton County,” Smythe was quoted as saying in the news release. “I believe on May 3, Hamilton County Republicans will reject crony capitalism in favor of a businessman who will listen to voters, and who will consider the benefits the people will receive from County contractors, as opposed to the benefits the contractors will receive from the people.”

There is no question Mark Heirbrandt has raised much more money for this campaign compared to Smythe.  Heirbrandt has been running ads on cable TV and is utilizing direct mail in his campaign.

Here’s my view on all this.  There is a reason Mark Heirbrandt is in the middle of this e-mail mess.  There is a reason Bill Smythe is not able to raise the same amount of cash as his opponent.  It’s all about our campaign laws – or, more precisely, our lack of effective campaign laws.

There are only 12 states that have no limits on individual campaign donors, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.  It sadly does not surprise me that Indiana is one of those 12.  The remaining 38 states have varying limits on the amount of money one can contribute to a state campaign.

A 1976 United States Supreme Court decision continues to confound me.  In Buckley v. Valeo, a majority of justices ruled that money is speech.  No matter how many times I attempt to read this opinion, I still fail to understand how that can be right.

So, if you can get enough other people to finance your campaign, or you are independently wealthy (think Ross Perot or Donald Trump) you can be a competitive candidate.  Even good people, not wealthy on their own, are forced to find others with money in order to finance their campaigns.  Even if the political funds don’t influence them once in office, just the appearance can be bad, very bad.

Our current system for funding political campaigns is hurting both Mark Heirbrandt and Bill Smythe in their respective campaigns for Hamilton County Commissioner District 3.  Anyone think we might need a new system?