Disclosure Digest: Virginia General Assembly blocks contribution limit bills

By

Ballotpedia staff

Welcome to The Disclosure Digest! Keep an eye out for new editions published on Tuesdays through June 2022.

Virginia General Assembly blocks bills limiting contributions, moves forward with disclosure bills

A Virginia Senate committee voted to block three bills prohibiting certain campaign contributions, while the House and Senate each passed bills focused on increasing donor disclosure.

Public utilities bill blocked

On Feb. 1, the Senate Committee on Privileges and Elections voted 11-4 to pass by indefinitely  SB45, sponsored by Sen. Chap Petersen (D), and SB568, sponsored by Sen. Richard Stuart (R). The vote to pass by indefinitely means the committee could reconsider the bills in future meetings, but if the committee takes no further action, the bills are dead. Both bills would have prohibited candidates and elected officials from accepting contributions from any public utility and would have prohibited public utilities from making contributions. Six of the committee members who voted to block the bills are Republicans and five are Democrats. All four members who voted against the motion to pass by the bills were Democrats. The committee also struck down another of Peterson’s sponsored bills, SB44, which would have limited individual donations to $20,000 per election cycle, in a 10-5 vote on Jan. 18. Six Republicans and four Democrats voted to block the bill, and five Democrats voted against the motion.

Disclosure bills advance

The Virginia House and Senate each passed disclosure-related legislation that would create additional campaign finance reporting requirements. HB492, sponsored by Del. David Bulova (D) and four other House Democrats, would require campaign committee treasurers to keep accounts of campaign contributions and expenditures and authorize the Department of Elections to conduct reviews of a percentage of campaign committees. The Department of Elections would report the results of the reviews to the State Board of Elections, the Governor, and the General Assembly and make them available on the Department’s website. The House passed the bill 81-19 on Feb. 4. Forty-seven Democrats and 34 Republicans voted for the bill, while one Democrat and 18 Republicans voted against it.  

SB318, sponsored by Sens. Barbara Favola (D) and Scott Surovell (D), would broaden campaign advertisement disclosure requirements to include electioneering communications. It would also require certain advertisements supporting the passage or defeat of a referendum to disclose the names of the sponsor’s three largest contributors in a disclaimer. The Senate approved the bill 23-15 on Jan. 24. Nineteen Democrats and four Republicans voted in favor of the bill, while Republicans cast all 15 “no” votes. 

Reactions

In response to the Senate committee blocking SB45, Petersen said, “Every year I present this bill, and every year someone comes ready with some clever comeback to block this bill.” Stuart said he filed SB568 because he believes public utility companies have too much influence in the state’s politics. “I felt compelled to file this bill to try to stop this activity,” Stuart said, “[b]ecause clearly they’ve become too powerful in Richmond.” Brennan Gilmore, executive director of Clean Virginia, said, “Each lawmaker that continues to oppose common-sense good governance and rate reform is failing families and small businesses across the Commonwealth.” 

Chris Nolen, an attorney representing Dominion Energy, said campaign finance laws should not single out particular industries. “This is banning political speech by two corporations. And when you do that, you elevate the speech of others,” Nolen said. Similarly, Ron Jefferson, external affairs manager at Appalachian Power, said the states the company operates in treat all corporations equally under campaign finance laws: “Seven of them prohibit contributions from any corporation. Three of them have limits on all corporations. And then we have Virginia that has unlimited for everyone.” Sen. Jill Vogel (R), who argued against SB44, said, “Contributions are speech. When you set up artificial barriers to speech, people find ways around it. I think sunlight is the best way. It’s imperfect, but I think it’s, in Virginia, as good as we can get right now.”

Of the bills that passed each chamber, Nancy Morgan, a state coordinator for the group American Promise, said the increase in campaign spending during the 2021 election prompted some lawmakers to view disclosure legislation more positively. Morgan said: “After the most expensive election in Virginia history, with independent spending coming in from outside the state and with attack ads, it raised legislators’ awareness that campaign finance reform isn’t necessarily a threat, that good laws protect legislators as well as enhancing good government and building the confidence of voters.”  Del. Tim Anderson (R), one of HB492’s sponsors, said his constituents are concerned with donors’ influence in the state’s politics and support disclosure measures. “Virginia is the Wild West. It’s embarrassing,” Anderson said. “The voters want to talk about it. The voters want it.”

The big picture

Number of relevant bills by state: We’re currently tracking 97 pieces of legislation dealing with donor disclosure and privacy. On the map below, a darker shade of green indicates a greater number of relevant bills. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we’re tracking. 

Number of relevant bills by current legislative status: 

Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s): 

Recent legislative actions

For complete information on all of the bills we are tracking, click here. 

  • California AB236: This bill would require campaign finance committees to report the name of each individual who owns or controls a limited liability company or a foreign limited liability company from which the committee received a campaign contribution.
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Democratic sponsorship
    • This bill died on Feb. 1.
  • Flordai H0617: This bill would exempt personal identifying information of a donor or prospective donor to the direct-support organization of the Statewide Council on Human Trafficking who desires to remain anonymous from public records requirements. It would also provide an exemption from notice requirements for specified meetings. It provides for future legislative review and repeal of the exemption under the Open Government Sunset Review Act.
    • Primary emphasis: Privacy
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill was referred to committee on Feb. 4.
  • Florida H0921: This bill would prohibit a foreign national from making or offering to make contributions or expenditures in connection with any election held in the state.
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill was referred to committee on Feb. 4.
  • Florida S1352: This bill would prohibit a foreign national from making or offering to make contributions or expenditures in connection with any election held in the state.
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill was referred to committee on Feb. 3.
  • Indiana SB0134:  This bill would require nongovernmental organization donations to a state agency or local unit of government to be listed in a separate line item in the budget of the state or local unit of government. The budget line must specify each individual state employee or local government employee, whichever is applicable, whose salary is funded in whole or in part from the donated money.
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill passed the upper chamber on Jan. 31.
  • Kansas HB2579: This bill would allow a candidate for state office to request an exemption from the electronic filing requirement for campaign finance reports.
    • Primary emphasis: Privacy
    • Unknown sponsorship
    • This bill was referred to committee on Feb. 1.
  • Kansas SB429: This bill would allow a candidate for state office to request an exemption from the electronic filing requirement for campaign finance reports.
    • Primary emphasis: Privacy
    • Unknown sponsorship
    • This bill was referred to committee on Feb. 3.
  • Kentucky HB301: This bill would allow the Transportation Cabinet and the Energy and Environment Cabinet to raise money from a governmental agency, individual, nonprofit organization, or private business for the Adopt-a- Highway Litter Program or other statewide litter programs. These contributions would be treated as restricted funds and would not be subject to state disclosure restrictions. 
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill was referred to committee Feb. 1.
  • Maryland HB721:  This bill would require a political club to be established as a political committee, to file a statement of organization, and submit campaign finance reports. 
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill was referred to committee on Feb. 3.
  • Mississippi HB1126: This bill would prohibit any government official from soliciting or accepting contributions from an individual or nonprofit corporation for conducting state or local elections in the state. Instead, all costs and expenses related to conducting elections shall be paid for with public funds.
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill died on Feb. 1.
  • Mississippi SB2577: This bill would repeal the reporting threshold for campaign contributions and would require candidate committees to report each person or political committee who contributes to the reporting candidate or political committee.
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill died on Feb. 1.
  • Mississippi SB2576: This bill would require a candidate for nonpartisan judicial office or a candidate’s political committee t0 disclose contributions prior to the date of the election in which the candidate is running. 
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill died on Feb. 1.
  • South Dakota HB1319: This bill would prohibit federal candidate campaign committees from making donations to candidates for state office.
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Republican sponsorship
    • This bill was referred to committee on Feb. 2.
  • Utah HB0040: This bill would prohibit the disclosure of donor information to a government entity if the donor requests anonymity in writing, the entity has no regulatory or legislative authority over the donor, and the entity is engaged in educational, charitable, or artistic endeavors.
    • Primary emphasis: Privacy
    • Bipartisan sponsorship
    • This bill passed the upper chamber on Feb. 4.
  • Virginia HB492: This bill would require campaign committee treasurers to keep accounts of campaign contributions and expenditures and authorize the Department of Elections to conduct reviews of a percentage of campaign committees. The Department of Elections would report the results of the reviews to the State Board of Elections, the Governor, and General Assembly and make them available on the Department’s website.
    • Primary emphasis: Disclosure
    • Democratic sponsorship
    • This bill passed the lower chamber on Feb. 3.

Thank you for reading! Let us know what you think! Reply to this email with any feedback or recommendations.