Contribution limits have been lifted in the Illinois comptroller race between incumbent Leslie Munger and Democratic challenger Susana Mendoza after Munger’s husband loaned $260,000 to her campaign.

State law stipulates any contribution exceeding $250,000 to a candidate’s own race abolishes the limits for all candidates in the race.

Gov. Bruce Rauner appointed Munger last year following Judy Baar Topinka’s death. The winner of the November election will finish the remainder of the four-year term.

St. Louis aldermen advanced Board Bill 53 out of committee on Tuesday, September 20.

The bill would limit contributions to municipal candidates to $10,000 per city election cycle. Such a limit is nearly four times the proposed state candidate contribution limit currently slated for the November ballot.

A final vote on the municipal measure is expected as early as October. The board bill, if passed, would take effect April 6, 2017.

Photo of the Gateway Arch in St. Louis by Daniel Schwen in Wikimedia Commons.

Lobbying

“Boehner Joins Influential K Street Firm” by Kate Ackley for Roll Call

Massachusetts: “Business Lobby Holds New Sway on Beacon Hill” by Frank Phillips for Boston Globe

Campaign Finance

“Court Rules against FEC in Ad Case” by Jonathan Swan for The Hill

District of Columbia: “No Jail Time for Key Figure in ‘Shadow Campaign’ for Former D.C. Mayor” by Ann Marimow for Washington Post

Missouri: “Campaign Contributions Limit Amendment to Appear on Missouri Ballot” by Jason Hancock for Kansas City Star

Tennessee: “Speaker Harwell: Need to change campaign investment loophole” by Dave Boucher and Joel Ebert for The Tennessean

Wisconsin: “An Inside Look at How Politicians Beg for Big Checks” by Matea Gold for Washington Post

Ethics

“Trump Used $258,000 from His Charity to Settle Legal Problems” by David Fahrenthold for Washington Post

West Virginia: “City Councilman’s Meeting with Construction Company Raises Ethics Questions” by Abigail Darlington for Charleston Post and Courier

Elections

“Gaming the Six-Week Election Day” by Sasha Issenberg and Steven Yaccino for Bloomberg.com

With the Missouri Supreme Court denying an appeal of two lower court rulings, a constitutional amendment reinstating campaign contribution limits will appear on the November ballot. State contribution limits, originally approved by voters in 1994, were repealed by the General Assembly in 2008.

If passed, the 2016 ballot measure would ban direct corporate and labor union contributions and limit individual and committee contributions to statewide candidates to $2,600 per election. Contributions to political parties would be capped at $25,000 per election.

We had an amazing experience at the 2016 NCSL Legislative Summit. Our team offered immediate, up-to-date knowledge to clients throughout the week.

You can benefit from the same expertise. We are always available to answer questions. Contact us today at info@stateandfed.com.

The California Legislature has been very active in the days leading up to the August 31 deadline for each house to pass bills. On August 30, Assembly Bill 700, a measure that would impose new disclosure requirements for political advertisements, failed by a single vote in the Senate.

Senate Bill 1349 had better luck gaining passage yesterday and is headed for Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk. SB 1349 will require changes to Cal-Access, California’s outdated online campaign contribution and lobbying database.

Photo of the California State Capitol by Griffin5 on Wikimedia Commons.

On August 18,  District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser returned an unsigned bill to reform the District’s procurement processes signaling that it can become effective without her signature. On August 24, the legislation was sent to Congress for the 30-day congressional review period needed for enactment. The bill will make procedural changes and establish the Office of the Ombudsman for Contracting and Procurement.

As introduced, the bill had a pay-to-play provision that banned campaign contributors from bidding on contracts over $100,000 for a year after making a donation to a District candidate. The pay-to-play provision was defeated in a council vote and is not part of the final bill.

On July 20, a federal court ruled the city of Austin’s campaign contribution blackout period unconstitutional. The blackout period allowed officeholders, candidates, and their respective committees to only accept campaign contributions during the last 180 days before an election or recall election. In Zimmerman v. City of Austin, Texas, the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, concluded the law was unconstitutional under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

In addition, the court found an Austin City Charter provision designating a 90-day requirement for campaign account terminations to be unconstitutional.

District Court Judge Lee Yeakel did uphold the city’s contribution limits for mayoral and city council candidates, finding the limit a constitutional regulation of protected First Amendment activity. The ruling also found City Councilman Don Zimmerman, who originally brought the lawsuit last summer, did not have standing to challenge the aggregate limits of the total contributions a candidate can accept from sources other than natural persons eligible to vote in a postal zip code completely or partially within the Austin city limits.

Photo of Austin, Texas by Eric A. Ellison on Wikimedia Commons.

Jersey City Councilman Michael Yun has proposed changes to the city’s pay-to-play laws.

The changes would broaden the laws to include the city’s autonomous agencies as well as restrict some vendors from contributing to city elected officials seeking higher office. The proposal would also extend the ban on no-bid city contracts, from one year to four years, for those who contribute more than $300 to a candidate.

Yun, a longtime critic of Mayor Steve Fulop, claims the changes are meant to close loopholes in the current law and not to target Fulop. In the past, Fulop’s donors have received large contracts with the city Municipal Utilities Authority, an autonomous agency not bound by current pay-to-play rules. Fulop is also rumored to be considering a 2017 gubernatorial run.

Yun submitted his proposal to corporation counsel for review and hopes to receive initial approval from council at its July 13 meeting.

Photo of Jersey City by David Jones on Wikimedia Commons.

Lobbying

Florida: “Broward Health Will Start Lobbyist Registration in June” by Dan Christensen and Karla Bowsher for FloridaBulldog.org

Illinois: “Daily Fantasy Sports Betting Bill Shelved amid Lobbying Accusation” by Ivan Moreno (Associated Press) for State Journal-Register

Oregon: “Lobbying, Campaign Contributions Give Special Interests Clout” by Hillary Borrud for Hillsboro Tribune

Pennsylvania: “Investigation Puts Scrutiny on Lobbyists, Political Ties” by Brad Bumsted and Mike Wereschagin for Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Rhode Island: “Rhode Island Senate Passes Lobby Reform” by Matt O’Brien (Associated Press) for WJAR

Campaign Finance

Minnesota: “Campaign Regulatory Board Stymied by Legislature” by Brian Bakst for Minnesota Public Radio

Montana: “Group of Republicans Calls for Special Session on Campaign Finance” by Holly Michels for Helena Independent Record

Ethics

Colorado: “Councilman Says He Will Start Drafting Changes to Denver Code of Ethics” by Jon Murray for Denver Post

Kentucky: “Governor Gets 237 Derby Tickets. Who Uses Them?” by Tom Loftus for Louisville Courier-Journal

New York: “SUNY Polytechnic Office Scoured for Evidence of Bid Rigging” by Jesse McKinley for New York Times

Elections

“Clinton’s Challenge: Become a change agent in a year shaped by voter” by Philip Rucker for Washington Post

On May 25, U.S. District Judge Charles Lovell partially stayed his order from May 17 striking Montana’s contributions limits. On May 17, Lovell ruled the state’s current statutory campaign finance contribution limits were unconstitutionally low. The state determined the ruling reinstated the contribution limits in place before the statute was enacted.

However, the contribution limits allowed from political parties in the previously enacted law were lower than the amounts ruled unconstitutionally low. Because of this, the court issued its partial stay as to the amount political parties may contribute. All other contribution limits will remain from the reinstated law, adjusted for inflation. The partial stay will remain in effect pending the state’s appeal of the entire case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Gov. Terry is the subject of a federal investigation surrounding contributions to his gubernatorial campaign. The Department of Justice is looking into donations received while McAuliffe was a board member of the Clinton Global Initiative, a charitable foundation set up by former President Bill Clinton.

Among many contributions of interest, the FBI is focusing on $120,000 from a Chinese businessman, Wang Wenliang. Contributions from foreign nationals are illegal, though Wang holds permanent U.S. resident status. Wang has been known for his contributions in the U.S., giving to Clinton’s foundation as well as to universities and political causes in other states.

Campaign Finance

“Donald Trump, in Switch, Turns to Republican Party for Fund-Raising Help” by Maggie Haberman, Ashley Parker, and Nick Corasaniti for New York Times

California: “Company Donates Free Billboards to Englander as L.A. Weighs New Sign Regulations” by David Zahniser for Los Angeles Times

California: “‘I Have, in Fact, Done the Crime’: Rep. Ami Bera’s father admits illegal campaign contributions” by John Myers for Los Angeles Times

Pennsylvania: “Allentown Engineer’s Plea in FBI Probe Revealed” by Emily Opilo and Peter Hall for Morning Call

Ethics

“Conservatives Accuse Facebook of Political Bias” by John Herrman and Mike Isaac for New York Times

“Senior Gray Advisor Sentenced to Six Months for 2010 Mayoral ‘Shadow’ Campaign” by Spencer Hsu and Ann Marimow for Washington Post

Kentucky: “Kentucky’s Two Most Recent Governors Are Feuding, and It’s Ugly and Very Public, Too” by Adam Beam (Associated Press) for U.S. News & World Report

Wisconsin: “Kevin Kennedy Stepping Down as Head of Embattled Elections, Ethics Board” by Patrick Marley for Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Elections

“Our Fictional Pundit Predicted More Correct Primary Results Than Nate Silver Did” by Virgil Texas for Washington Post

“Hillary Clinton Gives U.F.O. Buffs Hope She Will Open the X-Files” by Amy Chozick for New York Times

“Sanders, Trump Easily Win West Virginia Primary; Trump Picks Up Nebraska Too” by Abby Phillip, John Wagner, and Anne Gearan for Washington Post 

Q. My employer is a wholly owned subsidiary of a parent corporation.  Does a parent corporation, a subsidiary, or other affiliated entity have its own contribution limit or must the contributions be aggregated and have a shared limit?

A. This is a very important question that must be addressed when making a contribution, particularly when there is a hierarchy to the corporate structure.  If a limit is shared, the parent, subsidiary, or other affiliated entity must have an open line of communication when it comes to making political contributions.

In New York, each affiliated or subsidiary corporation, if a separate legal entity, has its own limit.

In California, contributions made by certain combinations of affiliated individuals, entities, and committees must be aggregated.  It all comes down to a matter of control:

• The contributions of an entity whose contributions are directed and controlled by any individual must be aggregated with contributions made by that individual and any other entity whose contributions are directed and controlled by the same individual.
• If two or more entities make contributions directed and controlled by a majority of the same persons, the contributions of those entities must be aggregated.
• Contributions made by entities majority-owned by any person must be aggregated with the contributions of the majority owner and all other entities majority-owned by that person, unless those entities act independently in their decision to make contributions.

So in California, a parent and subsidiary share a contribution limit if the decision to make a contribution is directed and controlled by a majority of the same persons.  If the parent and subsidiary act wholly independently of each other in deciding to make a contribution, the parent and subsidiary each have their own limit.

In New Jersey, if a corporation has subsidiaries, affiliates, branches, or locals, then the contributions of these organizations cannot exceed the applicable contribution limit in the aggregate.  Two or more corporations will be conclusively deemed to be affiliated if:

• Any individual, corporation, partnership, company, association, or other entity owns, directly or indirectly, more than a 30 percent interest in each of such corporations; or
• One such corporation owns, directly or indirectly, more than a 30 percent interest in the other such corporation.

These are just a few examples of aggregation of limits.  As we always advise, verify the rules in your state before making political contributions.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: experts@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.