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

Minnesota disclosure bill clears committee

A Minnesota House committee advanced a bill on March 8 that would require nonprofits to disclose donor information for certain independent expenditures. Rep. Jamie Long (D) introduced HF3190 on Feb. 7 with 12 other Democratic co-sponsors. Sen. Lindsey Port (D) introduced a companion bill, SF3281, on Feb. 21.

What the bill would do

Minnesota law requires groups making independent expenditures to include a disclaimer disclosing the group’s name and either its mailing or web site address. Section 10A.01, subdivision 18 defines independent expenditures as “expenditure[s] expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate or local candidate.” Under section 211B.04, subdivision 3, “online banner ads and similar electronic communications that link directly to an online page that includes the disclaimer” are excluded from the disclaimer requirement.

HF3190 would require organizations making independent expenditures to name their three largest contributors during the year prior to the expenditure being published or becoming public. The bill would remove the exemption for online ads and other electronic communications, subjecting them to the same disclosure requirements as other independent expenditures.

The bill also redefines express advocacy. Section 10A.01 of the state code currently defines express advocacy as “a communication clearly identifies a candidate or a local candidate and uses words or phrases of express advocacy.” This bill would amend the definition to include a communication which, “when taken as a whole and with limited reference to external events, such as the proximity to the election, is susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal advocating the election or defeat of one or more clearly identified candidates.”

The bill was referred to the House State Government Finance and Elections Committee, which held three hearings on it. The committee voted 8-4 to send the bill to the House Ways and Means Committee on March 8. Seven of the committee’s eight Democratic members voted to advance the bill (Rep. Gene Pelowski (D) was absent) along with Republican committee member Rep. Steve Drazkowski (R). The four other Republican members voted no. The House Ways and Means Committee must advance the bill for it to be considered by the full House.

Minnesota is one of two states with a divided legislature where neither party controls both the upper and lower chambers. The Democratic Party controls the Minnesota House of Representatives and the office of governor, while the Republican Party controls the upper chamber of the Minnesota State Senate.

Legislators in Nebraska, Virginia and West Virginia have also introduced bills that would require groups making independent expenditures to report their top contributors. Like HF3190, Virginia HB489 and SB318 would require organizations to disclose their top three contributors, while Nebraska LB8 and West Virginia SB107 would require groups to identify any person who contributed more than $250.

Reactions

Long said the bill “does not stop any speech, does not curtail any speech,” and it would “help voters make better informed choices” by allowing them to see who is funding an ad. “If the ad you see is from Minnesotans for Sunshine and Puppies, but it’s backed by somebody with a clear political point of view you would want to know that. Could there be an appearance of corruption? Could there be a financial interest involved? Voters want to know,” Long said. Rep. Ginny Klevorn (D) said, “Free speech is important to all of us, and we want to make sure that we keep free speech front and center. Good healthy campaign finance laws and good healthy election laws make that happen.”

Rep. Jim Nash (R) said the bill would put people at risk of “being doxxed by the people who oppose the exercise of free speech.” Nash, who voted against the bill, asked the committee to consider “the implications of what happens. An ordinary, everyday business owner who wants to donate to a candidate of their choice and they may happen to be the top donor.” Rep. Jon Koznick (R) said the legislature should be doing more to protect free speech. “You should be working in the opposite direction to instill people’s free speech rights more strongly in how they support different candidates,” said Koznick .

What we’ve been reading

The big picture

We’re currently tracking 128 pieces of legislation dealing with donor disclosure and privacy. Of these bills, 103 are primarily focused on disclosure, and 25 are primarily focused on privacy. To reflect this distinction, the charts in this section and the recent legislative actions below are divided between disclosure legislation and privacy legislation. On the maps 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.

Donor disclosure legislation

Number of relevant bills by state:

Number of relevant bills by current legislative status:

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

Donor privacy legislation