PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Maine residents overwhelmingly approved a referendum this week to limit donations to political action committees that spend money independently in candidate elections, setting the stage for a legal showdown over caps on individual donations so-called Super PACs that spend freely in elections.
In the nation’s only campaign finance reform initiative, residents voted on Election Day to limit individual donations to super PACs to $5,000. Advocates are fully expecting a lawsuit that they hope will bring clarity to PAC donations after the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door to unlimited spending by super PACs.
The measure was carefully crafted to survive legal challenges as states try to find a way to regulate campaign spending after the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, said state Sen. Rick Bennett, a supporter of the proposal.
“We have become a place where our democracy is bought and sold by the wealthiest people in our country,” said Bennett, a Republican from Oxford. “People of all political stripes support this measure. The only people who are really against it are the moneyed interests who are abusing the system.”
The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision opened the floodgates for gigantic business and unions to freely spend money on elections, and an appeals court decision three months later lifted restrictions on individual spending.
The Maine initiative does not seek to restrict candidates’ independent spending. Instead, it focuses on restrictions on individual donations to super PACS, an area the Supreme Court has not ruled on, observers say.
Cara McCormick, director of Citizens to End Super PACs in Maine, said the goal is to reduce the outsized influence that super PACs currently enjoy through so-called “dark money” spending.
Political nonprofit groups are not required to disclose their donors and do not have to reveal much about what they employ the donations they receive for. A super PAC can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to independently campaign for candidates for federal office. Its activities must be reported to the Federal Election Commission but are not otherwise regulated unless coordinated with the candidate or campaign.
“We have the right to stand up to big money in Maine politics. We assert our right to limit the amount of money someone can give to a super PAC to eliminate not only corruption in our politics, but the appearance of corruption in our politics. We believe it’s worth fighting for,” McCormick said.
In Maine, the limit would apply only to PACs that spend money on behalf of candidates, not caucuses involved in referendums. Maine law currently limits contributions to candidates, not PACs. In a general election, individuals can donate a maximum of $1,950 to a gubernatorial candidate and $475 to a legislative candidate.
Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig, a long-time campaign finance reform advocate, and his nonprofit Equal Citizens supported the Maine referendum. A similar citizens’ initiative in Massachusetts was blocked by the state attorney general on constitutional grounds.
The U.S. Supreme Court has not ruled on the issue of individual contributions to PACs, and long-standing case law supports the notion that states can limit individual contributions to PACs despite a District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruling to the contrary. Lessig said.
The concern with unlimited individual contributions is the risk of quid pro quo, even if super PACs spend independently and don’t coordinate directly with a candidate, Lessig said.
Ultimately, the matter will have to be decided by the Supreme Court.
“I am very optimistic that the U.S. Supreme Court will apply existing case law that states are free to limit contributions,” he said. “The question this case would raise is not about asking the Supreme Court to change its jurisprudence and is not about overturning Citizens United.”
The Maine law will go into effect this winter unless there is a legal challenge after an emphatic vote. Almost 75% of voters supported the citizens’ initiative.
