A new analysis has found there will be legal challenges if a state ballot campaign to limit corporate political donations is successful.
The Mop Up Michigan initiative, on the ballot as Proposal 2, aims to reform the state’s campaign finance laws.
One of Proposal 2’s changes would bar campaign contributions by state contractors that do more than $250,000 a year in work for the government, as well as the state’s regulated utilities like gas and electric companies.
Attorney Karley Abramson examined the amendment for the nonpartisan Citizens Research Council. She said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that campaign contributions are protected speech – unless it’s a clear quid pro quo: an exchange of money for favors.
“It does not include general favoritism or influence,” Abramson said.“So simply having an elected official vote in a way that benefits you, is not enough to constitute a quid pro quo.”
The current constitutional standard has largely been in place since the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling in 2010.
Since then, spending on elections and wealthy individuals has grown dramatically.
The Citizens United ruling was 5-4, but the high court has since moved to a 6-3 conservative majority.
“So there's only so much that any state can do to really tackle this issue under the current framework,” Abramson said.“To change this in the big picture would require either a change to the U.S. Constitution or just a different makeup of the Supreme Court.”
Other provisions of Mop Up Michigan would require donor and spending disclosures on certain political ads put on the internet.
If one portion of Proposal 2 is struck down, Abramson said, the other parts will be fine.
“There is a severability clause within it,” she said. “If any part is found unconstitutional, the unaffected pieces would remain in effect.”
