NEW YORK – He lives in New York City; his name is on no ballot. Yet real estate investor Howard Rich is a key reason why citizens in distant states will be voting Nov. 7 on bitterly contested initiatives that would limit state spending, impose term limits and curb land-use regulation.
Rich is a libertarian who vigorously champions the cause of limited government. He is the driving force behind a network of groups that has promoted ballot measures in at least 14 states this year.
Several of the campaigns were derailed by legal and signature-gathering problems. But states where Rich-backed measures did make the ballot – often with most of their funding from his network – include Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Nebraska, Oregon and Washington.
His adversaries view Rich as a menace, deploying large sums of money to export a potentially harmful ideology to states where he has no personal stake. Others see him as a committed political philanthropist, acting on his convictions in ways that are a legitimate part of U.S. democracy.
Rich declines to provide financial details of his efforts and his donor list. The liberal Ballot Initiative Strategy Center – a critic of Rich – said this week the total spending by his affiliated groups on 2006 ballot measures has exceeded $13.2 million.
Agreeing to answer questions only by e-mail, Rich said he had followed all campaign finance rules. In the states where he helped put property-rights measures on the ballot, he wrote, “I do not own any property and will not personally profit in any way.”
One of the Rich-backed initiatives would require state and local governments in Arizona, California, Idaho and Washington to compensate property owners if a land-use regulation lowers property values. In Washington, the initiative is I-933. Supporters say the measures provide justice for landowners hamstrung by strict development restrictions, such as bans on subdivision.
But what Rich depicts as a quest for liberty, his angry critics see a back door way of paralyzing government so big companies and big developers can do whatever they want.
This year’s four regulatory takings measures are being fought by alliances of conservation groups, local officials and others who say the proposals would impede the government’s ability to protect people.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
