State senators invited experts to testify on campaign finance reform Tuesday in the hope of gauging public opinion before introducing a bill later this year.
Some are calling for Wisconsin to follow the 13 other states who have recently raised limits on individual contributions to state political campaigns. Wisconsin's limits were last raised 40 years ago.
“The argument that we have too much money in politics is greatly overstated,” said Rick Esenberg, president of the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty.
Likening money to speech, Esenberg went further, suggesting the right to donate in any capacity should be protected on constitutional grounds.
“If you find yourself trying to restrict speech, you are entering a constitutional danger zone,” Esenberg said.
James Bopp, a First Amendment attorney, argued limits on contributions also drain money from official campaigns and toward individually run political action committees that allow limitless contributions.
“The money will flow back to the candidate who will have more control over their campaign,” Bopp said.
Opponents of deregulating campaign finance said they were worried that without limits, wealthy donors and large corporations will have a substantial and corrupting influence on Wisconsin politics.
Matt Rothschild, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, mentioned Gogebic Taconite’s substantial contribution to the right-leaning Wisconsin Club for Growth as a case of a possible “pay to play” scheme where a law beneficial to the mining giant was influenced by money.
“They want to spend money because it supports their desired outcome,” Rothschild said.
He called for no increase in contribution limits, suggesting instead to publicly fund campaigns. He said a matching donations up to $150 with money from the public treasury would amplify the voice of Wisconsin’s less powerful.
“Increasingly the vast majority of citizens are being relegated to the sidelines of political discourse,” Rothschild said.
Current law dictates that contributions of more than $100 require a disclosure of occupation and employer, which critics claim hampers free speech, misrepresents businesses and is not relevant.
Kevin Kennedy, director of the Government Accountability Board, disagreed, contending that “overwhelming support from a particular occupation says something about that candidate's regulatory stance.”
