HELENA, Mont. — Montana voters will decide whether to curtail corporate and anonymous political spending in state elections, directly challenging the local fallout from the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling.
The Citizens United decision removed restrictions on how much corporations and groups with undisclosed donors — commonly called "dark money" — could spend in campaigns.
Jeff Mangan, who previously ran Montana's campaign finance oversight office, is backing the ballot measure. "There is too much money in state elections," Mangan said. The initiative would make candidates "more beholden to voters than they are fundraisers."
The proposed measure would sidestep Citizens United by redefining corporate powers under Montana law. Corporations would retain all current business authority, Mangan explained, "with the exception of one, and that is to spend in our politics." The measure also would block anonymous political donations.
Todd O'Hair, representing the Montana Chamber of Commerce, opposes the initiative. O'Hair argues that eliminating anonymous and large corporate spending would silence Montana businesses. He emphasized that the business community has as much, or more, at stake in election outcomes as individual voters do. Political spending, he said, is the only avenue for local businesses to influence policies such as tax legislation.
Brendan Glavin, an analyst with OpenSecrets, a nonprofit that tracks political spending, said the Montana initiative would increase political transparency. But he cautioned on its practical effect: "Money is not going to dry up. People want to spend on elections. People are going to find a way to make that happen." He noted that wealthy individuals are willing to publicly attach their names to political expenditures.
Legal precedent for such measures remains uncertain. Hawaii enacted a comparable law this year that is currently blocked in court, signaling potential legal challenges ahead for Montana.
