The U.S. Senate is moving forward on a bill requiring the electronic filing of campaign finance reports by Senate candidates, bringing the technology standards of the ‘world’s greatest deliberative body’ into the 21st century.
The disclosure of large donors to candidates (not independent groups) – we can quibble on the threshold – is a reasonable measure to guard against the appearance of or potential for quid pro quo, but Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) has long delayed the electronic filing bill.
The legislation, entitled the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, will soon receive a hearing and pass, The Hill reports.
The measure was first introduced in 2003 by Sens. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). Ensign provided the major stumbling block impeding the bill’s passage. He consistently placed holds on the bill, and his objections should concern advocates of the First Amendment in politics:
The Nevada senator wanted to include an amendment to the bill that would have required any organization filing ethics complaints against senators to reveal its major donors.
Still, Ensign – who was chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) during the 2008 cycle – has said repeatedly that he favors electronic filing.
"The Democrats probably have enough votes now to pass e-filing, a measure Sen. Ensign has long supported," spokesman Tory Mazzola told The Hill in an e-mail. "They can do so without adding transparency to our partisan and broken ethics process."
Without taking a position on whether or not outside groups are allowed to file ethics complaints against Senators, it’s ridiculous to assert that groups should be forced to disclose their donors – subjecting them to potential retaliation or intimidation from political opponents or those in government – in order to file complaints.
Such a stunt even gives die hard "reformers" like Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington pause. If the Senate decides to allow outside ethics complaints, they shouldn’t be able to bully groups into not filing by forcing them to choose between their free speech (and their donors’ rights to freedom of association) and their desire to hold lawmakers accountable.
Currently, Senate campaign treasurers must file paper copies of their quarterly reports with the Secretary of the Senate, who then transmits the reports to the FEC, which enters the data manually into their electronic database (this process takes weeks). House campaigns are required to file reports electronically to the FEC, saving time and government expense.
Even longtime campaign regulation fighter Jim Bopp Jr. supports electronic disclosure (generally):
"The disclosure of contributions to candidate campaigns is one of the areas where disclosure is justified and transparency is beneficial to voters, as long as it doesn’t unduly burden the campaigns," said Jim Bopp Jr., who is currently arguing the Republican National Committee’s lawsuit against elements of the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act.
"This is a good thing," Bopp added, though he said the $200 limit over which Senate candidates must disclose contributions is too low.
Ensign has indicated he’s dropping his weird poison pill to this legislation. He should also drop the idea in the future if the issue comes up in other bills.
