The Sun Never Rises: Sources of Michigan’s Dark Money Set to Remain Hidden

Two days after Christmas, Governor Rick Snyder gave a belated gift to dark money groups and those donors who felt stifled by Michigan’s campaign finance limits. Snyder signed Senate Bill 661, which the Money Tale described in depth here, after it reached his desk without changes to it’s controversial provisions.

The bill will affect the 2014 elections in Michigan in two crucial ways. First, the bill doubles the maximum allowable contributions to candidates. Previously, statewide candidates could not accept donations from individuals in excess of $3,400, state senate candidates could not accept donations above $1,000, and state House candidates were limited to $500. Those limits are now $6,800, $2,000, and $1,000, respectively. These limits are not set in stone, however, as the legislation also included provisions coming into effect in 2019 which will index those limits to inflation, meaning those limits should gradually rise over time.

The effects of these changes could be sizable, but may pale in comparison to the effects of the changes that were not made. The bill Snyder signed included the provision added via amendment in the State Senate which would block the Secretary of State’s proposal to require electioneering communications groups disclose their donors under the provisions of the Michigan Campaign Finance Act. In approving this change and blocking disclosure, Snyder directly reversed himself from an earlier white paper released by his campaign. That document read, “All electioneering communications – broadcast, printed, and telephonic – that feature the name or image of a candidate for public office or ballot initiative should be considered expenditures subject to appropriate disclosure requirements.”

Under the terms of the new legislation, such groups will now be required to end electioneering communications or robo-calling with an acknowledgement including the name of the group. They will not, however, be considered expenditures under the Michigan Campaign Finance Act, and thus will face no requirement to disclose donors. This isn’t a theoretical matter either: the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, after examining only television ads targeting statewide offices and high court races, estimated that there was more than $70 million in unaccountable electioneering communications between 2000 and 2010.

Reposted from Follow The Money - Jan 9, 2014 by Zach Holden, shared using Creative Commons Attribution

Michigan Eclipse: Will the Sun Ever Shine on the State’s Dark Money?

A tumultuous morning in the Michigan State Capitol revealed a stark divide between Secretary of State Ruth Johnson and the Michigan State Senate on the issue of disclosure of dark money. At stake was was whether the sources of “some of the most negative advertising in political campaigning,” to quote Johnson, should be required to disclose their spending and their donors.

In our recent 2013 scorecard of essential disclosure requirements for independent spending, the National Institute on Money in State Politics gave the state of Michigan an F because it was one of 25 states that do not require any disclosure of electioneering communications, which are those that stop just short of advocating for or against candidates. This lack of transparency has been Michigan’s policy dating back to 2004, when then-Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land ruled that electioneering communications were not covered under Michigan’s campaign finance laws and thus were free from disclosure requirements. This morning, Secretary of State Johnson announced that she planned to use the powers of her office to require reporting of electioneering communications within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election, and also require groups spending more than $500 on electioneering communications during a single election cycle to form a committee and disclose donors.

Within an hour of Johnson’s announcement, the Senate Committee on Local Government and Elections voted 3-1 to prohibit administrative regulation of electioneering communications. The full bill, passed 20-18 a few hours later by the full senate, also included provisions that would double existing contribution limits for candidates and PACs and require the Secretary of State to adjust the limits every four years to account for inflation. The fate of additional disclosure now rests with the Michigan House of Representatives and Governor Rick Snyder. Will Michigan retain its failing grade for disclosure or will it support transparency?

Reposted from Follow The Money - Nov 14, 2013 by Zach Holden, shared using Creative Commons Attribution