HELENA – A judge’s recent decision to toss Montana’s century-old ban on corporate political spending has left observers and enforcers alike trying to figure out exactly what is now legal.
Some experts feel Judge Jeffrey Sherlock’s decision will have less impact than originally feared since there are already so many ways money comes into elections, including political action committees and soft money given directly to the political parties. Others say they don’t know what to expect.
Commissioner of Political Practices Dennis Unsworth, who regulates Montana campaign finance rules, says he will require corporations to report contributions and expenditures just as if they were political committees.
Late in the week he hammered the group behind the lawsuit that undid the ban — Western Tradition Partnership — with a list of violations for failing to disclose political spending. The allegations now go to state court, with potential fines running three times the amount they are found to have spent illegally.
Organized now as a nonprofit, Western Tradition still needs to disclose spending, Unsworth said.
So would corporations that decide to get politically involved, he said.
“The public has a right to know who is involved,” Unsworth said.
Unsworth said the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case that led to the state court decision on Monday, along with the resulting regulation change by the FEC, have given people a misconception that anonymous money will be flowing into elections.
The campaign ethics law chief said Montana laws requiring details on election spending will still be enforced as much as possible.
But that, too, is a problem. Within the past few years there has been a big increase in independent spending on elections through nonprofit groups. Western Tradition Partnership has already been spending hundreds of thousands of dollars that way, according to Unsworth’s investigative report, released last week.
And many of those groups — often formed with little more than a post office box and a name — have not been reporting their spending even though Unsworth said they probably should be.
Unsworth said that WTP has promised donors they can give as much as they want and keep their activity anonymous. The group even solicited money from foreign corporations, the commissioner charged.
Western Tradition Partnership was launched in Montana by former Republican political operatives before it was moved to Denver. The executive director, now based in the Washington D.C. area, did not return a call seeking comment.
However, WTP said in an e-mail that Unsworth’s findings were politically motivated.
Many believe the nonprofit groups don’t have to report spending on elections because they are engaged in what they describe as education efforts.
“I find that notion absurd,” Unsworth said. “But this is all new activity for us.”
Sherlock’s decision throws in a new wrinkle. Now corporations, even those organized for the sole purpose of politics, can spend money directly from their treasury.
“Money in politics is kind of like an octopus. You have all these arms out there,” said political scientist Craig Wilson of Montana State University-Billings. “I just don’t see this becoming the biggest arm.”
Wilson said he does not expect brand-name corporations to get involved because they’re trying to sell products to people of all political stripes.
“I think that the ability to spend by corporations, or unions, may be being stressed too much,” Wilson said. “I am not sure it is going to have the kind of impact that people think it may have.”
Attorney General Steve Bullock had argued in court that the state’s ban is unique and should stand despite the U.S. Supreme Court decision. He pointed out that Montana’s law was in response to corporate mining barons taking over state politics.
Bullock has promised an appeal to the state Supreme Court.
Jonathan Motl, a Helena lawyer who has worked on many election issues over the years, said he was glad to see that Sherlock restricted his decision to independent expenditures and left in place the ban on direct corporate contributions to individual candidates.
“The citizens of Montana should be thankful that our attorney general and the court preserved the limit on direct corporate contributions to candidates. It could have been a worse decision,” Motl said.
But Motl said corporate contributions for or against candidates with independent campaigns will make enforcement even harder for the commissioner of political practice.
“The parties that want to spend the money not only have more resources than citizens when it comes to spending, they have more resources than the state when it comes to regulating this sort of thing,” Motl said. “Now to keep the election fair for its citizens the state has got to find ways to force timely disclosure.”
Debra Bonogofsky of Billings was hit with attack mailers from Western Tradition Partnership during a legislative primary she lost and is now running a write-in campaign to fight back. She said the problem is larger than many think.
“An individual person cannot stand level with the corporations money-wise. If they are going to be allowed to throw that money at elections we need to know who is behind them,” she said. “My aim in life is to bring them out into the light. I know that won’t be easy.”