SACRAMENTO ? State lawmakers are moving to curb anonymous political donations in California after a national election in which nonprofit groups secretly poured hundreds of millions of dollars into campaigns.
Legislators have proposed greater disclosure by donors, higher fines for violations and new powers for officials to investigate suspicious contributions to certain groups. Other measures would boost disclosure requirements for political advertising and campaign websites.
The moves were prompted largely by an Arizona group's $11-million donation this year to a California campaign committee, which used the money to oppose Gov. Jerry Brown's tax-hike measure and support another ballot initiative that was intended to curb unions' political fundraising.
State election officials sued the Arizona group to determine the identities of the contributors ? only to discover that the money had come from two other nonprofits, which under federal law are not required to reveal their donors. State law requires groups to identify only donors who gave money specifically for political purposes.
Ann Ravel, chairwoman of the Fair Political Practices Commission, said new legislation is necessary to update the Political Reform Act, the Watergate-era law that governs campaign finance in the state.
Amendments to the 1974 law require a two-thirds vote. It is unclear whether California Democrats, who now wield historic supermajorities in both houses of the Legislature, will use their newfound powers to make the proposed changes.
State Sens. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) and Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) have introduced legislation, SB 3, to close the state loophole for nonprofits. Their bill would require nonprofits that give at least $100,000 to a political campaign over the course of a year to release the names of the donors behind the contribution.
"Laundering money through nonprofits in an attempt to avoid transparency is fundamentally undemocratic," Yee said. "Our democracy should not be bought and sold in shady backroom deals."
The rise of so-called dark money is a byproduct of the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, which lifted the ban on direct political expenditures by corporations. That triggered a surge of election activity by groups incorporated under the tax code's section 501(c)4 as social welfare organizations, which are allowed to engage in issue advocacy.
Advocates for more campaign finance reporting said they have been pushing lawmakers for years to tighten California's disclosure rules, which are already among the strongest in the nation.
"It took $11 million to get their attention," said Phillip Ung, a policy advocate at Common Cause, which filed the original complaint about the Arizona donation. "Campaign strategists are constantly adapting their strategies to sneak as much money into campaigns from secret donors as possible, and the law needs to keep up with those strategists."
Assemblyman Roger Dickinson (D-Sacramento) has legislation, AB 45, to prevent what he called last-minute "money bombs" in elections. It would require nonprofits participating in a political campaign to identify any donors giving at least $50,000 six months before an election.
"This is the kind of information voters and the public need to have before they cast their votes," Dickinson said.
The bill would also empower the state's political watchdog to seek injunctions against nonprofits to compel disclosure.
Other proposals target political advertising.
State Sens. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo) have introduced SB 52, which would require the top three funders of political ads to be identified in the spots and on the campaign's website.
Another bill, SB 26 by state Sen. Louis Correa (D-Santa Ana), would increase the size of the disclosure notice on slate mailers, which are paid advertisements for candidates and ballot measures, telling voters who prepared and promoted the fliers.
michael.mishak@latimes.com
Times staff writer Chris Megerian contributed to this report.
san onofre paula deen birth control recall nick carter leslie carter aaron carter sister pfizer
TODAY ONLY grab a? Microsoft ? Xbox LIVE 12-Month Gold Membership?for only?$39.99 (Reg. $59.99) with free shipping from Best Buy!? Just head on over HERE and type 6541912 in the search box!
There are rumors swirling that Miley Cyrus and Liam Hemsworth may have secretly wed, after family Christmas photos shared online show them both wearing new bands on their left hands. Miley posted her festive photos to her Instagram, leaving fans to speculate she may have tied the knot just before the holidays. One photo featuring ...
After the communication breakdown over surge pricing last New Year’s Eve, Uber is taking precautions to make sure users are aware of fare increases next week. Surge pricing has become more common now among Uber users but when fares increase dramatically, it catches consumers off guard. So to prevent any surprises. Uber customers will be alerted to the surge pricing multiple which they have to confirm and accept before making any request for a ride. Uber says that when there are extreme spikes in demand on the evening, customers will also have to take Uber?s ?Surge Sobriety Test.? And Uber?s Fare Estimator will give all customers the ability to estimate their fare prior to any ride request. Uber warns in a blog post: It?s going to be a crazy night and Ubers are going to be pricey, so here are a few pointers to keep in mind. The fare estimate feature will only be available for the iPhone app, unfortunately. And all riders will need to accept the fare multiplier before finalizing a booking. uber says the average surge multiple will be about 2 times normal prices, during the worst times (12:30 AM until 2:45 AM), but prices during extreme spikes could cost you $100 before time and mileage charge. Uber adds that the most expensive times to take an Uber are 8:30pm ? 9:45pm and 12:30am ? 2:45am. The best times to take an Uber on NYE are before 7pm, 10pm ? 12:10am and 3am on. The company’s CEO and founder Travis Kalanick will also be holding a live chat for any one who has questions about surge pricing on New Year’s Eve. Uber clearly learned its lesson from last year, when users were caught off guard by steep prices caused by surge pricing. For example, one user was charged $75 for a two minute car ride. With the sobriety test, and fare estimator, the company is giving users all the information they need to decide if a pricey car ride is worth the splurge. The sobriety test is particularly interesting, and I wonder if this will become more widely used in the app. Ride-sharing app SideCar also warned users today of its surge pricing that will take place on New Year’s Eve.
