Who is Buying Virginia Elections?
Gov. Bob McDonnell and state lawmakers must address a yawning loophole in political contribution rules created by recent rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court and the Federal Election Commission.
Virginia has never been on the cutting edge of campaign finance reform, but state leaders have always prided themselves on laws that require full and prompt disclosure of donors.
For that reason, Gov. Bob McDonnell and state lawmakers must address a yawning loophole in political contribution rules created by recent rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court and the Federal Election Commission.
The relaxed regulations have unleashed more than $455 million in spending by special interest groups to influence elections across the nation, including $1.5 million in Virginia’s 2nd congressional district race, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
The problem was created by two terrible decisions. First, the Supreme Court ruled in January that corporations and unions can spend unlimited sums on independent election ads directly advocating for or against political candidates for federal office.
While their reasoning was flawed, eight of the nine justices did conclude that disclosure requirements are constitutional and that citizens have a right to know who is bankrolling the nasty attack ads splattered across their TV screens.
“With the advent of the Internet, prompt disclosure of expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with the information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable for their positions and supporters,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.
But the FEC undercut that portion of the court’s decision with its own ruling that disclosure requirements apply only when a donor gives money to a special interest group earmarked for a specific TV ad. Unearmarked donations to an organization with a 501(c)4 tax status can remain secret.
It’s unlikely that Congress will fix that loophole anytime soon. This summer, Senate Republicans blocked an effort to force special interest groups to identify their donors. But that doesn’t prevent Virginia from adopting its own disclosure laws.
At the very least, McDonnell should propose, and lawmakers should adopt, a state law requiring special interest groups to report their donors when they spend money in state elections on television ads, robocalls or direct mail.
It’s less clear whether McDonnell could broaden such a law to cover congressional races in Virginia, but there’s no court case specifically prohibiting it.
Federal elections are coordinated by cities and counties with assistance from the state, so an attorney general who’s not shy about going to court could plausibly argue that the commonwealth has a legitimate interest in disclosure.
McDonnell hasn’t committed to push for legislation that would bring sunlight to independent expenditures, but he’s philosophically in tune with the idea.
“We’ve got a very open, very broad sunshine law already in Virginia,” he told listeners on a Northern Virginia radio station last month. “I think we do it the right way where we don’t have limits on contributions, but we have full disclosure on a regular basis, so that people can decide whether money played a role in a particular legislator’s decision. I think that’s the right approach.”
McDonnell was criticized when his attorney general campaign collected $2.1 million of its total $5.6 million take from the Republican State Leadership Committee, a political action committee that wasn’t required to reveal donors until after the election. After he was elected, he supported a bill sponsored by Del. Chris Jones of Suffolk that required outside groups to report large contributors if they give $10,000 or more to a state candidate.
That law is on the books, but it doesn’t cover the independent expenditures that have plagued this year’s midterm congressional elections. Some of the groups responsible have ties to McDonnell allies, including former campaign chairman Ed Gillespie and Fred Malek, chairman of the governor’s reform commission.
Politicians are often reluctant to support campaign finance reform because they believe they hold an advantage under the status quo. McDonnell knows better. He won more decisively last year under stronger disclosure laws than he did when he was collecting money with mysterious origins.
The reality is that these groups are run by partisans, but they are funded by assassins – corporations wanting to take out officials who have voted against their interests. It’s possible that McDonnell and state lawmakers will one day run afoul of those same secretive, vindictive special interests. They have a right to know exactly whom they’re dealing with, and stronger disclosure laws would make sure they do.
Recent Comments
