It’s always nice to be cited, but the good-government group Common Cause isn’t happy the public financing dissenters in the Moreland Commission’s preliminary report used one of its studies to argue against a small-dollar matching system.

Common Cause released a report last month showing the rise of independent expenditure groups in the 2013 elections, primarily in New York City.

The seven commission members who broke with the 25-member panel on the public financing recommendation pointed to that Common Cause report as a sign that public financing of political campaigns can be easily undermined thanks to IE groups.

Full stop, says Common Cause’s Susan Lerner.

“Unfortunately it seems they did not read to the end of the report,” she said in a statement on Tuesday. “As the report concludes, public financing is in fact the only factor which mitigated the impact of millions in independent expenditures which flowed to various council races. Without public financing, we would not have Council Member Carlos Menchaca, who won election despite the fact the Jobs for NY outspent him and his opponent. Without public financing we would not see Council Members with the courage to claim their independence despite receiving support from the REBNY backed PAC. And without public financing we would not have a minority majority Council representing the great diversity of New York City.”

Still, Lerner says the commission got the broader picture right when it comes to the prevalence of IE spending.

“But the Commission is correct to highlight the fact that independent expenditure spending has become rampant, and that candidates who can’t keep up, risk falling behind,” she said. “That’s exactly why we need public financing of elections at the state level. So that candidates can compete by prioritizing their constituents over special interests.”