City Council passed an ordinance creating registration and reporting requirements for organizations involved in making independent expenditures. Organizations supporting or opposing any candidate for mayor, alderperson, or municipal judge are required to register with the city clerk upon accepting contributions made for, incurring obligations for, or making independent expenditures exceeding $25 in the aggregate during a calendar year. Such organizations are also required to file reports as required by Wisconsin Statutes.

The ordinance is meant to take the place of a provision no longer enforced by the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) after it reached a settlement in a suit filed by two advocacy groups. As such, the ordinance is ripe for challenge on the same grounds as the original GAB rule was challenged.

Photo of the Madison skyline by Patrick43470 on Wikimedia Commons.

On March 21, 2013, the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission (ELEC) issued an advisory opinion deciding it does not have the jurisdiction to declare contribution limits unenforceable or unconstitutional for political committees making only independent expenditures.

Advisory Opinion 01-2013 holds current state registration and reporting requirements and contribution limits apply to political committees making independent expenditures.

Fund for Jobs and Growth, a political organization not registered in the state and intending to make independent expenditures in the state’s 2013 elections, requested the opinion in order to determine whether it needed to register and report with the state and whether the state contributions limits for political committees applied to its fundraising activity. The organization was held to be a political committee requiring registration and reporting.

While holding state contribution limits apply, the opinion notes several other jurisdictions have held contribution limits applied to political committees making independent expenditures are unconstitutional. ELEC did not find “that the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has addressed these issues, nor has the United States Supreme Court issued a specific determination concerning the constitutionality of contribution limits for political committees making only independent expenditures.”

The essence of the rule will force people who make independent expenditures to disclose funding and amounts spent by treating them as a political committee. Therefore, they will have to register as an independent expenditure committee and, for those elections in which they support or oppose a candidate, file reports before and after the election. The committee will also be responsible for filing periodic reports on January 15 and July 15 of each year.

Independent expenditures are defined by the state as expenditures made in support of or opposition to a candidate, expressly advocating for the election or defeat of a candidate, and made in complete independence from the candidate. Expressly advocate is defined as communicating with specific words calling for the election or defeat of a candidate, such as “vote,” “oppose,” “support,” “defeat,” “elect,” or “reject.”

Using these definitions, groups can avoid registering and reporting as an independent expenditure committee if they avoid using the special buzz words that would make their advertisements expressly advocating. The board of elections has said these rules are not completely new, but rather have been adopted to shed light on the rules and to ensure that people understand exactly what is expected when making independent expenditures. The rules have already taken effect and committees making these expenditures will next have to file a report on January 15, 2013.

The New York State Board of Elections has approved and adopted rules concerning independent expenditures, but many feel the rules won’t do a thing to slow down the campaign money train. According to the rules, people making independent expenditures will have to register and report as if they were a political committee.

Independent expenditures are defined by the state as expenditures that expressly advocate the election or defeat of a candidate that the candidate did not authorize in any way. Expressly advocated is defined as containing express words calling for the election or defeat of a candidate. Therefore, committees can run advertisements that avoid using certain words and can escape registration and reporting requirements.

Bill Mahoney, a research coordinator for a New York good government group said the new rules “will make it even easier for independent expenditure committees, Super PACs, to hide who’s paying for them, and because of that it will lead to language that is much more harsh than what we’ve heard before.”

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on October 19, 2012 ordered the district court to enjoin Puerto Rico from enforcing provisions of Law 222, a campaign finance law passed in 2011. The provisions in question required corporations and unions to establish separate committees in order to make independent expenditures.

Such committees were required to hold membership meetings and vote to approve expenditures related to elections. The court found those provisions were likely to be held unconstitutional regulations of political speech.

Coat of Arms of Puerto Rico courtesy of Creative Commons on Wikipedia.

The Board of Supervisors has adopted an ordinance limiting campaign contributions for all county elective office candidates, and increasing public disclosure requirements for independent expenditures.

The new ordinance limits contributions to $3,900 per election cycle from a single source, including corporations, special interest groups, and individuals. The ordinance also requires all county candidates and independent expenditure committees to electronically report contributions and expenditures exceeding $10,000.

The ordinance goes into effect January 1, 2013.

Seal of San Bernardino County courtesy of Jetijones on Wikipedia.

The New Hampshire Attorney General’s office has advised the Secretary of State against restricting contributions to political committees that only make independent expenditures.

While New Hampshire’s statute R.S.A. §664:4 sets contribution limits for political committees, the law does not distinguish between political committees in general and committees making only independent expenditures.

The Attorney General made this recommendation, and reviewed the current status of law concerning independent expenditures, in a letter to the Secretary of State on August 1, 2012. The Attorney General also stated in the letter that enforcement of “contributions to any political committee is a fact-specific determination that can only be made on a case-by-case basis.”

On Friday, July 6, 2012, Governor Pat Quinn signed Senate Bill 3722 into law, rewriting the state campaign contribution limits. Under this new law, if a natural person or an independent expenditure committee makes independent expenditures in support of, or in opposition to, the campaign of a candidate or incumbent in an amount over $250,000 for statewide office, or $100,000 for all other elective offices, then the contribution limits are waived for all candidates for that specific office. For example, if an independent expenditure committee spends more than $250,000 for commercials against candidate A, who is running for governor, then the contribution limits do not apply for any of the gubernatorial candidates.

The new law also establishes registration and reporting requirements for independent expenditure committees. The law goes into effect immediately, which means these rules apply for the state house and senate seats which are up for election in November.

Our Highlighted Site of the Week is the Federal Election Commission’s (FEC) new Campaign Finance Disclosure Portal. The site was announced just yesterday and offers powerful resources allowing the visitor to access campaign finance data sets and perform advanced segmentation. The types of information included are independent expenditures; bundled contributions; candidate and committee summaries; receipts, disbursements, and a cash summary for PACs and National Party committees; leadership PAC and sponsor data; and much more.

According to the FEC’s news release: “The Commission announced the release of a new campaign finance disclosure portal that will simplify access to the wide range of data available on the agency’s website. The disclosure portal provides a single point of entry to federal campaign finance data.”

Information can be accessed through interactive maps, easily readable charts, or by searching with a name or keyword. Data sets can also be downloaded as XSD, XML, or CSV files in order to perform your own analysis or data mashup.

The FEC promises the Campaign Finance Disclosure Portal will be regularly updated throughout the election cycle. With both the site and its Disclosure Data Blog, you can subscribe to its feed via RSS so that you can keep up with any updates.

Enjoy your weekend everyone!

The New York City Campaign Finance Board has voted to adopt its final rules for the disclosure of independent expenditures.

The rules require the reporting of independent expenditures by individuals, organizations, corporations, and other entities in New York City elections.

The adopted rules are available here.

The Times Developer Network is now offering data from reports received by the Federal Election Commission through its Campaign Finance API (application programming interface). What was once a set of reports updated weekly, or in some cases daily, is now updated every 15 minutes.

You can find campaign finance information for the presidential and congressional candidates, PACs and super PACs, electronic filings by date and type, independent expenditures, and electioneering communications.

For the full story, be sure to read “Campaign Finance Data in Real Time” by Derek Willis in The New York Times.

You’ll be interested to also see “Campaign finance updates in real time? There’s an API for that” by Meranda Watling in 10,000 Words.

The New York City Campaign Finance Board has released revised proposed rules regarding the disclosure of independent expenditures in city elections.

The revised proposed rules are available here.

The revisions include a new definition of electioneering communication, different reporting requirements, and changes to covered expenditures.

The board will accept public written comment on the rules until March 2, 2012. The final rules will be adopted at a subsequent meeting of the board.

This afternoon Rhode Island Governor Lincoln D. Chafee announced the upcoming introduction of a bill requiring those engaged in “independent expenditures” and “electioneering communications” to report donors and expenditures and to include disclaimers on media and internet advertising.

The Governor’s bill, Transparency in Political Spending Act (TIPS), was created with legislative leaders and Common Cause Rhode Island.

The Governor’s press release detailing the bill defines “independent expenditure” is an expenditure that expressly advocates for the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate and is not coordinated with any candidate’s campaign, authorized candidate committee or political party committee. “Electioneering communications” is defined as print, broadcast, cable, satellite, or electronic media communications not coordinated with any candidate, authorized candidate committee or political party committee which unambiguously identifies a candidate and is made within 60 days of a general or special election or within 30 days of a primary and can be received by 5,000 or more persons in the constituency.

Governor Chafee said, “[TIPS] seeks to [make] individuals and organizations trying to influence the outcome of an election accountable to the people of Rhode Island.” The collaboratively developed legislation was announced by the Governor with Common Cause Rhode Island’s Executive Director, John Marion, and the legislation’s sponsors: House Speaker Gordon Fox, Senate President M. Teresa Paiva Weed, Senate President Pro Tempore Juan Pichardo, and Representative Chris Blazejewski.

A Montana Supreme Court’s decision upholding the state’s law prohibiting independent political expenditures by a corporation related to a candidate, in spite of Citizens United v. FEC, has been appealed to the US Supreme Court.

According to the SCOTUSblog, Justice Kennedy has called for a response from the state of Montana by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, February 15.

For a detailed explanation of the appeal, see Lyle Denniston’s article on SCOTUSblog at http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/02/new-citizens-united-sequel-2.

In December of last year, the Montana Supreme Court found Citizens United v. FEC did not compel invalidating the state’s 1912 Corrupt Practices Act.

In the Court’s majority opinion in Western Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Attorney General of the State of Montana, the Court wrote, “The corporate power that can be exerted with unlimited political spending is still a vital interest to the people of Montana.”

The Court concluded the state, because of its history and the history of the Act, has a compelling interest to impose statutory restrictions, emphasizing the Citizens United decision allows restrictions to be upheld if the government demonstrates a sufficiently strong interest.

In making its argument, the decision asserts that a “material factual distinction between the present case and Citizens United is the extent of the regulatory burden imposed by the challenged law.” The Court found in contrast to the “complexity and ambiguity” of restrictions for federal PACs, PACs formed and maintained in the state are “easily implemented” by the filing of “simple and straight-forward forms or reports.”

Attorney James Bopp, Jr., counsel of record for the petitioner, argues for the US Supreme Court to summarily reverse the Montana decision, writing, “The lower court’s refusal to follow Citizens United is such an obvious, blatant disregard of its duty to follow this Court’s decisions that summary reversal is proper.”