Debate over a campaign-finance reform bill has prompted claims of unconstitutionality and requests for Gov. Scott McCallum to forfeit his veto power.
The bill, SB 104, introduced by Sen. Mike Ellis, R-Neenah, would impose spending restrictions on all statewide campaigns.
In a December letter to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, Attorney General Jim Doyle said the bill may be unconstitutional.
“I believe that SB 104 as written poses serious practical and constitutional questions,” Doyle said in the letter. “Requiring daily reporting of independent disbursements may well be unconstitutional. It would constitute a prior restraint on political speech, limit the ability of groups of individuals to engage in free speech, and force public disclosure of intended First Amendment activities before engaging in them.”
Under Wisconsin law, the governor is granted veto power. However, in this case legislators are requesting Gov. Scott McCallum give up this power.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala, D-Madison, asked McCallum to sign any campaign-finance legislation without exercising his veto power.
“The governor said several weeks ago in regard to Senate Bill 104 that if a campaign-finance reform bill reached his desk, he would sign it,” said Debbie Monterrey-Millett, McCallum’s press secretary.
The governor has not commented on forfeiting his veto power in this circumstance, but Monterrey-Millet said it is unlikely to occur.
“I don’t think any governor in the country would give up their veto power,” she said.
Mike Browne, spokesman for Chvala, said the bill is a bipartisan compromise and would be favorable to both parties.
Comprehensive campaign-finance reform legislation has not passed since the mid-1970s, Browne said.
“Given the inflation alone, the amount of money is not realistic,” Browne said. “We need to make adjustments, to take a step back in terms of what is going on and lower what has been spent.”
The bill would mean a significant decrease in spending, Browne said.
Tim Dalton, spokesman for Rep. Stephen Freese, R-Dodgeville, said the bill is not in its final form and the legislature should have the opportunity to look at the bill and make amendments.
“The bill is unfinished and [the legislature] might be able to make changes that could be beneficial,” Dalton said. “Campaign-finance reform is a huge issue for Rep. Freese. We just want to be able to act on it and to have the chance to look at it.”
Assembly Speaker Scott Jensen, R-Waukesha, wants Doyle to expand on the unconstitutionality of the bill, Steve Baas, spokesman for Jensen, said.
“We don’t want to pass a bill that is going to be thrown out in court,” Baas said. “We want the attorney general to elaborate on his concerns.”
Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin, said the bill will strongly reduce special interest influence in the state.
According to Heck, the bill is unconstitutional in its current form. He said the bill must be challenged and approved by the state Supreme Court before campaign finance can be changed. The Buckley decision in 1976 was the last federal comprehensive campaign-finance reform package; Heck said the process used would necessarily require alterations due to changes in the political climate.
“The Supreme Court ruled on the Buckley decision in ’76, and so much has changed since then,” said Heck, who helped author the legislation. “We didn’t have this kind of money polluting and corrupting politics [back then].”
