From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:
Missouri lawmakers may end limits on funding
By Jo Mannies
POST-DISPATCH POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
03/26/2006
The Missouri Senate has voted to ask Gov. Matt Blunt to consider
scrapping the state's campaign-finance restrictions that his father
helped put in place 12 years ago.
It's now up to the state House to take up the proposal, which would
eliminate Missouri's limits on how much individuals or groups can
donate to candidates running for office. The proposal is attached to a
broader ethics bill.
The measure was approved by the state Senate earlier this month and
instead would impose contribution and spending limits on state House
and Senate campaign committees. It also would bar legislators from
collecting contributions when the Legislature is in session.
State Sen. Tim Green, the proposal's architect, said he's calling for
the changes out of frustration. He added that he is somewhat surprised
fellow senators overwhelmingly approved the idea.
Green, D-St. Louis County, says the limits have become "a complete
joke" because so many officeholders have figured out ways to skirt
them.
"We're not stopping the flow of money from coming in," he said. "You
just can't track it."
Green contends that it would be better if Missouri went back to its
old system of unlimited donations, with full disclosure. That's the
approach still in place in Illinois.
A spokesman for the governor says he has yet to take a position on the
bill. That's also the case for the state Republican and Democratic
parties.
But Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon says he opposes any effort to
remove Missouri's donation limits, which he defended in court during
numerous legal battles throughout the 1990s. In the end, the U.S.
Supreme Court ruled in 2000 in favor of the current setup.
"As I said in the U.S. Supreme Court. ... a regime of unlimited
contributions creates a public belief that access to an elected
official and control over the public agenda are for sale, and
available for a price that only a few can pay," Nixon said.
Missouri's current individual donation limits are $1,275 per election
for statewide candidates, $650 for state Senate candidates and $325
for state House candidates. Similar restrictions, which are increased
periodically to reflect inflation, also apply to candidates for local
offices.
But Green notes that many officeholders and donors are finding legal
ways around the limits. Some officials influence "legislative district
committees," which are fundraising entities set up by local political
parties or activists. These committees can accept donations of any
size.
Any private donor can give unlimited amounts to multiple independent
or political groups, who each in turn can make donations within the
limits to the same favored candidate.
Political parties and independent groups also can collect donations of
unlimited size for "independent expenditures" on behalf of a
candidate. That spending doesn't count against the donation limits, as
long as there is no coordination with the candidate.
"I'm just sick of seeing all the money funneled to these committees,"
Green said. He noted that he was in the state House when it approved
the limits in 1994. "We thought we'd slow this spending down. We
didn't."
Bipartisan push for limits
The effort to set Missouri's donation limits was born in 1993, just
months after the state's voters overwhelmingly approved term limits
for state legislators.
Among those lobbying for the limits was Roy Blunt, who lost a 1992 bid
for governor and had just left office as Missouri's secretary of
state. During his eight years as the state's chief elections official,
Blunt had annually called for donation restrictions.
In 1993, Blunt became one of the leaders of Missourians for Fair
Elections, a bipartisan group that launched an initiative-petition
drive for donation limits because the Legislature refused to act.
Blunt, who's now the Republican majority leader in the U.S. House,
still supports Missouri's campaign-donation limits.
"The introduction of limits on political contributions in our state
was a good thing," Blunt said Friday. "I'm not opposed to revisiting
the amount of the limits, but I would hate to see them eliminated
altogether. The state House and Senate have plenty of time to revisit
the issue, and I'll be watching the issue with interest."
At issue in 1993 was the long-standing practice of Missouri candidates
to rely on "angels," a name given donors who were willing to
contribute large sums to campaigns.
For example: Anheuser-Busch Cos. Inc., the state's undisputed largest
donor at the time, gave more than $200,000 just to the two major-party
nominees for governor in 1992. The brewery donated $131,000 to
Republican William L. Webster and $75,000 to Democrat Mel Carnahan.
Soon other organizations joined in the pro-limit effort, including the
Missouri leaders of Ross Perot's United We Stand, and the
neighborhood-activist group known as ACORN.
Blunt and his allies dropped the initiative-petition drive after
then-Gov. Carnahan persuaded the Legislature to approve the current
setup in 1994.
But ACORN then launched its own effort for even lower donation limits.
In November 1994, 74 percent of Missouri voters approved Proposition
A, which restricted individual contributions to no more than $300
during each two-year election cycle.
A long court fight ensued. By July 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court had
tossed out Proposition A. In January 2000, the high court ruled in
favor of the current setup.
However, for a few weeks in 1999, Missouri candidates could accept
donations of any size while the Supreme Court pondered its decision.
And the state's candidates for governor took advantage.
Republican nominee Jim Talent collected $50,000 from a candy company
executive, while Democrat Bob Holden got $100,000 from a dentist in
Dallas.
Green acknowledges that a return to such large donations may raise
eyebrows. But he added that at least the public will know who wrote
those big checks, and who got them.