Secretary of State Scott Gessler has proposed a wholesale rewrite of Colorado campaign-finance rules — changes Gessler says are long overdue but critics call a heavy-handed attempt to allow big money to dominate elections.
Gessler, who represented Republicans as a campaign-finance lawyer before he was elected last year, said the proposed changes are needed to make the rules clearer. He also said they reflect case law issued since most of the current rules were written nearly a decade ago, after Colorado voters approved a constitutional amendment on campaign finance.
“These rules have sort of grown up since 2002,” Gessler said.
Critics say Gessler is once again overstepping his authority, trying to alter state statutes and the Colorado Constitution through rule-making to reflect his political beliefs.
“Secretary Gessler has made no secret of his disdain for campaign-finance regulation,” said Martha Tierney, a campaign-finance attorney who has represented organizations such as the Colorado Democratic Party.
“This rewrite of the rules furthers his goal of rolling back campaign-finance laws,” Tierney added…
Among the more significant changes, the proposed rules would:
• Limit the total fine that may be charged for late or incomplete campaign-finance reports to $9,000 — or $50 a day for up to 180 days. Currently, there is no limit to the number of days that fines may accumulate. In some cases, this leads to groups or candidates racking up huge fines that Gessler’s office says many groups cannot realistically pay.
• Maintain a $5,000 contribution-and-expenditure threshold for issue-committee reporting that Gessler created through rule-making earlier this year. Last week, a Denver district judge ruled that Gessler did not have the authority to raise the threshold from the $200 set in the Colorado Constitution. Gessler is appealing that ruling, saying a recent 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision found the $200 threshold unconstitutional.
• Require political groups known as 527s to limit the amount of money they accept from any person to $500 every two years, but only if the 527 “expressly advocates” for a particular candidate. To expressly advocate, an advertisement has to use certain words to explicitly ask people to vote for or against a particular candidate. Gessler and supporters say the rule would protect free speech, while critics say it provides a way for 527s to influence elections by collecting unlimited donations.
This is so blatantly transparent that I’m astounded it’s working.
