Part of the Series
Moyers and Company
Campaign finance reformers appear set to celebrate a big win Tuesday in Missouri, where voters are expected to approve a proposed constitutional amendment that would, among other things, reinstate campaign-donation limits in a state that, this year alone, has seen more than $120 million poured into campaigns by writers of six- and seven-figure checks.
A victory is expected because opponents of the measure, known as Amendment 2, aren’t even bothering to campaign against it.
It’s not that those who favor keeping Missouri’s current rules — which the legislature changed eight years ago to remove any limits on campaign donations — have given up. Instead, they’re waiting until after the election. That’s when they hope to return to court and get the amendment revised or tossed out. Opponents maintain that several of the amendment’s provisions are unconstitutional.
To see more stories like this, visit Moyers & Company at Truthout.
But so far, the courts have disagreed. After the legislature refused to reinstate campaign finance limits, those who wanted an end to the six- and seven-figure political donations that have resulted launched an initiative-petition drive to get Amendment 2 on the ballot.
When the measure qualified, organizations trying to keep it off the ballot went to court. They lost over the summer, and in September the Missouri Supreme Court rejected their appeal.
Opposition lawyer Chuck Hatfield says his clients will regroup after the election and decide whether to go to court again. Among the organization’s he’s representing in the effort to keep the lid off campaign donations in Missouri are Legends Bank, a mid-Missouri bank, and the Missouri Electric Cooperative, represents the rural electrical utilities. Both would be barred from contributing to candidates or to political action committees, under the wording of the initiative. It would not affect affect Ameren, one of the biggest electric companies in the state, which still could give to its political action committee.
In the meantime, the opponents have decided not to use the traditional campaign route of attack ads or fliers to try to defeat the proposal.
The proposed amendment restricts contributions to $2,600 per election for candidates for statewide offices, judgeships or the Missouri General Assembly.
It also would cap donations to political party committees to $25,000 per election, and would bar direct donations from corporations or labor unions. They could, however, set up political action committees that could donate money — as corporations and labor unions do on a federal level.
The amendment also bars committee-to-committee transfers, and bars an out-of-state committee from donating to a candidate unless the committee is registered with the state Ethics Commission, which handles campaign finance reports and enforces the state’s campaign finance laws.
Opponents particularly object to a provision that would bar certain types of banks and member-owned organizations, such as public utilities, from forming political action committees to give to campaigns.
Both sides agree the amendment’s most glaring omission is that its limits don’t apply to candidates for local offices.
But Todd Jones, the lawyer who crafted the measure, says its provisions are better than the current setup, in which Missouri has no limits on campaign donations and few restrictions on campaign committees. Just since the beginning of the year, according to records downloaded from the Missouri Ethics Commission, donors writing checks of $100,000 and above have dropped an eye-popping $121 million into contests for Missouri state offices.
Not all of those contributions would be affected: the proposed ban does not affect issue campaigns, such as the one to pass Amendment 2. But it would end the practice of writing big checks to candidates.
“If you give a million dollars to a candidate, whose call are you going to take?” Jones said. “Are you going to take mine? Or are you going to take the donor’s? So there’s a lot of issues with undue influence and impact that donation has on the actual politician.”
Jones was working on behalf of Fred Sauer, a wealthy conservative who bankrolled the petition drive because he says he believes Missouri corporations and wealthy individuals have blocked some conservative causes.
Missouri’s two leading candidates for governor — Democrat Chris Koster and Republican Eric Greitens – are split on the question of donation limits. Both have received six-figure or seven-figure donations.
Greitens contends that donation limits “favor entrenched career politicians and wealthy self-funding candidates over political outsiders and those who challenge the political status quo.”
Koster is a former opponent of campaign-donation limits, but says he has changed his mind because of the increasing flood of huge donations.
Still, he calls Amendment 2 only “an important first step.”
“I think we’re going to have to build on it, because it’s not a perfectly written vehicle,” Koster said. In particular, he points to the lack of limits on local candidates.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy