Board closes loophole in campaign contributions
The Campaign Finance and Disclosure Board adopted a resolution that requires full disclosure of campaign contributions to ballot questions. This decision has closed several loopholes that would have allowed millions of dollars of undisclosed contributions will flow to both sides of the marriage debate.By: Staff Report, Alexandria Echo Press
ST. PAUL, Minn. – The Campaign Finance and Disclosure Board adopted a resolution that requires full disclosure of campaign contributions to ballot questions. This decision has closed several loopholes that would have allowed millions of dollars of undisclosed contributions will flow to both sides of the marriage debate.
“Disclosure is essential to ensure a fair and open public debate on the marriage amendment,” said Mike Dean, executive director of Common Cause Minnesota. “The adopted rules will allow the public to know who is truly behind the political ads.”
The board determined that the groundbreaking disclosure law of 2010 applies to not only independent expenditure groups, but also ballot questions. This clarification will now require nonprofit corporations that contribute to a ballot question fund to disclose the source of those contributions. This requirement will prevent a money shell game, which political organizations use at the federal level to transfer money between groups to avoid having to disclosure the source of the funds.
“This decision will hopefully bring some additional civility to the debate by forcing groups and donors to be accountable for the ads they run,” said Dean.
In a letter to the board, Common Cause Minnesota, the League of Women Voters, Minnesota and the Brennan Center for Justice argued, “The Supreme Court has repeatedly found that disclosure is valuable for informing the public during an election. As the Court has explained, ‘transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages.’ Citizens United v. FEC, 130 S. Ct. 876, 916 (2010). This observation comports with our own experience. Every day we evaluate the content of speech based on its source. To say the author is irrelevant, as opponents of the staff recommendations have suggested, is plainly wrong.”
Tags: minnesota news, news, updates, politics, campaign
More from around the web