Lawmakers want to make it easier to raise campaign cash. Who will benefit the most?
The House Monday night passed a package of campaign finance law changes after a fiery debate that would double how much you can give to a Rhode Island political candidate each year.
The Republican sponsored legislation ultimately passed 41 to 29. Twenty-seven Democrats joined all nine House Republicans to send the bill on to the Senate.
Progressive Democrats blasted both hiking the $1,000 maximum annual individual contribution to $2,000 and raising the maximum size of donations that can be reported anonymously.
"I find it insulting to the working people of Rhode Island that we are even considering passing this self-serving piece of legislation," Rep. David Morales, D-Providence, told colleagues. "Because if we even want to raise the argument that this bill is about modernizing our campaign finance laws and adjusting contribution limits to inflation, then why don't we apply that logic to our minimum wage laws? Why don't we apply that logic to raising Medicaid reimbursement rates?"
Providence Democratic Rep. Rebecca Kislak said Rhode Island should be working toward greater transparency in campaign finance reporting, not less.
"I am very concerned about raising campaign finance limits and I am especially concerned about doubling the amount we candidates can report in the aggregate, which means that instead of listing all of our donations as many of us already do, we can not report individually donations of up to $100," she said. "Now this would be up to $200 and that's a lot of money to be sitting and hiding in aggregates on finance reports. I really firmly believe that sunshine is an antidote to to money in our campaigns."
The intent was to encourage contributions from small-dollar donors
Rep. Brian Newberry, the lead sponsor of the bill, said while the bill might allow top lawmakers rake in more campaign cash than they already do, he believes it would have a greater benefit to challengers who often struggle to raise the bare minimum to compete.
"The idea that I would be pushing a bill that I thought was going to help entrench the Democratic leadership of the General Assembly – I have to say it makes me laugh," Newberry, a North Smithfield Republican, said.
He said the motive of doubling the size of donations that can be reported in aggregate, that is, without personally identifying the donor, is to encourage contributions from small-dollar donors who don't want their name attached to a campaign.
"If you're challenging the Speaker of the House or the majority leader, nobody wants their name on your finance report ... not because they're trying to buy you with a huge project," he said. "There are people that want to participate. They don't want their boss knowing who they donated to. The aggregate is not there to hide dark money."
Newberry pointed to former House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello spending $340,000 in a 2020 re-election campaign, only to lose to Rep. Barbara Ann Fenton-Fung, as evidence that the marginal extra dollar raised will help insurgents more than incumbents.
"I'm simply saying there's only so much you can do with money in these races," he said. "The money has diminishing returns. That's the reality. But you know what does kill a campaign? When you can't raise money at all."
Other provisions of the bill that were generally supported by progressives include opening up public matching funds to primary candidates, although only to winning candidates after the vote.
The bill would also limit candidates' ability to list services they've received as "accounts payable" without reporting them as expenditures or contributions.
And it would set a definition of "fair market value" for campaign items in an attempt ambiguity that has made some in-kind contributions difficult to police.
This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: RI law could double maximum campaign donation, raise anonymous cap
