SB26: Bill Text

SB26,9,9 11.26 (1) (intro.) No individual may make any contribution or contributions to a candidate for election or nomination to any of the following offices and to any individual or committee under s. 11.06 (7) acting solely in support of such a candidate or solely in opposition to the candidate's opponent to the extent of more than a total of the amounts specified per candidate:

SB26, s. 18 Section 18. 11.26 (2) (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,9,16 11.26 (2) (intro.) No committee other than a political party committee or legislative campaign committee may make any contribution or contributions to a candidate for election or nomination to any of the following offices and to any individual or committee under s. 11.06 (7) acting solely in support of such a candidate or solely in opposition to the candidate's opponent to the extent of more than a total of the amounts specified per candidate:

SB26, s. 19 Section 19. 11.26 (2) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,9,20 11.26 (2) (a) Candidates for governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, state treasurer, attorney general, state superintendent or justice, 4% of the value of the expenditure level limitation specified in the schedule under s. 11.31 (1).

SB26, s. 20 Section 20. 11.26 (9) (a) and (b) of the statutes are amended to read:

SB26,9,25 11.26 (9) (a) No individual who is a candidate for state or local office may receive and accept more than 65% of the value of the total expenditure level limitation for candidates other than candidates challenging incumbent officeholders, as determined under s. 11.31 (1) and adjusted as provided under s. 11.31 (9), for the office for which he or she is a candidate during any primary and election campaign combined from all committees subject to a filing requirement, including political party and legislative campaign committees.

SB26,10,10 (b) No individual who is a candidate for state or local office may receive and accept more than 45% of the value of the total expenditure level limitation for candidates other than candidates challenging incumbent officeholders, as determined under s. 11.31 (1) and adjusted as provided under s. 11.31 (9), for the office for which he or she is a candidate during any primary and election campaign combined from all committees other than political party and legislative campaign committees subject to a filing requirement.

SB26, s. 21 Section 21. 11.26 (10) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,11,2 11.26 (10) No candidate for state office who files a sworn statement and application to receive a grant from the Wisconsin election campaign fund may make contributions of more than 200% of the amounts specified in sub. (1) to the candidate's own campaign from the candidate's personal funds or property or the personal funds or property which are owned jointly or as marital property with the candidate's spouse, unless the board determines that the candidate is not eligible to receive a grant, or the candidate withdraws his or her application under s. 11.50 (2) (h), or s. 11.50 (2) (i) applies. For purposes of this subsection, any contribution received by a candidate or his or her personal campaign committee from a committee which is registered with the federal elections commission as the authorized committee of the candidate under 2 USC 432 (e) shall be treated as a contribution made by the candidate to his or her own campaign. The contribution limit of sub. (4) applies to amounts contributed by such a candidate personally to the candidate's own campaign and to other campaigns, except that a candidate may exceed the limitation if authorized under this subsection to contribute more than the amount specified to the candidate's own campaign, up to the amount of the limitation.

SB26, s. 22 Section 22. 11.30 (2) (d) of the statutes is repealed.

SB26, s. 23 Section 23. 11.31 (title) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,11,5 11.31 (title) Disbursement levels and limitations; calculation.

SB26, s. 24 Section 24. 11.31 (1) (intro.) of the statutes is repealed and recreated to read:

SB26,11,9 11.31 (1) Schedule. (intro.) No candidate may make or authorize total expenditures from his or her campaign treasury in any campaign to the extent of more than the following amount for each of the offices indicated:

SB26, s. 25 Section 25. 11.31 (1) (a) to (d), (e) and (f) of the statutes are amended to read:

SB26,11,11 11.31 (1) (a) Candidates for governor, $1,078,200 $2,000,000.

SB26,11,12 (b) Candidates for lieutenant governor, $323,475 $250,000.

SB26,11,13 (c) Candidates for attorney general, $539,000 $700,000.

SB26,11,15 (d) Candidates for secretary of state, state treasurer, justice or state superintendent, $215,625 $250,000.

SB26,11,17 (e) Candidates for state senator, $34,500 total in the primary and election, with expenditures not exceeding $21,575 for either the primary or the election $80,000.

SB26,11,20 (f) Candidates for representative to the assembly, $17,250 total in the primary and election, with expenditures not exceeding $10,775 for either the primary or the election $40,000.

SB26, s. 26 Section 26. 11.31 (1m) of the statutes is created to read:

SB26,11,25 11.31 (1m) expenditure limitations for challengers. Notwithstanding sub. (1), if an incumbent officeholder seeks reelection, any other candidate for the same office may make or authorize total expenditures not exceeding 125% of the amount specified in sub. (1), adjusted as provided under sub. (9).

SB26, s. 27 Section 27. 11.31 (2) and (2m) of the statutes are repealed.

SB26, s. 28 Section 28. 11.31 (3) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,12,9 11.31 (3) Gubernatorial campaigns. For purposes of compliance with the limitations imposed under sub. (2) (1), adjusted as provided under sub. (9), and sub. (1m), candidates for governor and lieutenant governor of the same political party who both accept grants from the Wisconsin election campaign fund may agree to combine expenditure levels limitations under sub. (1) (a) and (b), adjusted as provided under sub. (9), and sub. (1m) and reallocate the total level limitation between them. The candidates shall each inform the board of any such agreement.

SB26, s. 29 Section 29. 11.31 (3m) and (4) of the statutes are repealed.

SB26, s. 30 Section 30. 11.31 (9) of the statutes is created to read:

SB26,12,15 11.31 (9) Cost-of-living adjustment. (a) In this subsection, "consumer price index" means the average of the consumer price index over each 12-month period, all items, U.S. city average, as determined by the bureau of labor statistics of the U.S. department of labor.

SB26,13,2 (b) The dollar amounts of all expenditure limitations specified in sub. (1) shall be subject to a biennial cost-of-living adjustment to be determined by rule of the board in accordance with this subsection. To determine the adjustment, the board shall calculate the percentage difference between the consumer price index for the 12-month period ending on December 31 of each odd-numbered year and the consumer price index for the base period, calendar year 1993. The board shall increase the expenditure limitations specified under sub. (1) by such amount each biennium, rounded to the nearest multiple of $25 in the case of amounts of $1 or more, which amount shall be in effect until a subsequent rule is promulgated under this subsection. Notwithstanding s. 227.24 (3), determinations under this subsection may be promulgated as an emergency rule under s. 227.24 without a finding of emergency.

SB26, s. 31 Section 31. 11.40 (2) and (3) of the statutes are amended to read:

SB26,13,7 11.40 (2) No public utility or anyone connected therewith may offer or give any special privilege to any candidate for public office or any committee or its members or employes, or any individual under s. 11.06 (7), or to any 3rd party at the request of or for the advantage of any of them.

SB26,13,10 (3) No candidate for public office or any committee or member or employe thereof or any individual under s. 11.06 (7) may ask for or accept any special privilege from any public utility.

SB26, s. 32 Section 32. 11.50 (2) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,14,2 11.50 (2) (a) Any individual who desires to qualify as an eligible candidate may file an application with the board requesting approval to participate in the fund. The application shall be filed no later than the applicable deadline for filing nomination papers under s. 8.10 (2) (a), 8.15 (1), 8.20 (8) (a) or 8.50 (3) (a), no later than 4:30 p.m. on the 7th day after the primary or date on which the primary would be held if required in the case of write-in candidates, or no later than 4:30 p.m. on the 7th day after appointment in the case of candidates appointed to fill vacancies. The application shall contain a sworn statement that the candidate and his or her authorized agents have complied with the contribution limitations prescribed in s. 11.26 and the expenditure limitations prescribed under s. 11.31 at all times to which such limitations have applied to his or her candidacy and will continue to comply with the limitations at all times to which the limitations apply to his or her candidacy for the office in contest, unless the board determines that the candidate is not eligible to receive a grant, the candidate withdraws his or her application under par. (h), or par. (i) applies.

SB26, s. 33 Section 33. 11.50 (2) (b) 5. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,15,2 11.50 (2) (b) 5. The financial reports filed by or on behalf of the candidate as of the date of the spring or September primary, or the date that the special primary is or would be held, if required, indicate that the candidate has received at least the amount provided in this subdivision, from contributions of money, other than loans, made by individuals, which have been received during the period ending on the date of the spring primary and July 1 preceding such date in the case of candidates at the spring election, or the date of the September primary and January 1 preceding such date in the case of candidates at the general election, or the date that a special primary will or would be held, if required, and 90 days preceding such date or the date a special election is ordered, whichever is earlier, in the case of special election candidates, which contributions are in the aggregate amount of $100 or less, and which are fully identified and itemized as to the exact source thereof. A contribution received from a conduit which is identified by the conduit as originating from an individual shall be considered a contribution made by the individual. Only the first $100 of an aggregate contribution of more than $100 may be counted toward the required percentage. For a candidate at the spring or general election for an office identified in s. 11.26 (1) (a) or a candidate at a special election, the required amount to qualify for a grant is 5% of the candidate's authorized expenditure limitation for candidates other than candidates challenging incumbent officeholders, as determined under s. 11.31 (1) and adjusted as provided under s. 11.31 (9). For any other candidate at the general election, the required amount to qualify for a grant is 10% of the candidate's authorized expenditure limitation for candidates other than candidates challenging incumbent officeholders, as determined under s. 11.31 (1) and adjusted as provided under s. 11.31 (9).

SB26, s. 34 Section 34. 11.50 (2) (g) of the statutes is repealed.

SB26, s. 35 Section 35. 11.50 (2) (h) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,15,11 11.50 (2) (h) An eligible candidate who files an application under par. (a) may file a written withdrawal of the application. A withdrawal of an application may be filed with the board no later than the 7th day after the day of the primary in which the person withdrawing the application is a candidate or the 7th day after the date that the primary would be held, if required. If an application is withdrawn in accordance with this paragraph, the person withdrawing the application is no longer bound by the statement filed under par. (a) after the date of the withdrawal.

SB26, s. 36 Section 36. 11.50 (2) (i) of the statutes is repealed.

SB26, s. 37 Section 37. 11.50 (9) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,15,23 11.50 (9) Limitation on grants. The total grant available to an eligible candidate may not exceed that amount which, when added to all other contributions accepted from sources other than individuals, political party committees and legislative campaign committees, is equal to 45% of the expenditure level limitation specified for the applicable office for candidates other than candidates challenging incumbent officeholders, as determined under s. 11.31 (1) and adjusted as provided under s. 11.31 (9). The board shall scrutinize accounts and reports and records kept under this chapter to assure that applicable limitations under ss. 11.26 (9) and 11.31 are not exceeded and any violation is reported. No candidate or campaign treasurer may accept grants exceeding the amount authorized by this subsection.

SB26, s. 38 Section 38. 11.50 (11) (e) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,16,4 11.50 (11) (e) No candidate may expend, authorize the expenditure of or incur any obligation to expend any grant if he or she violates the pledge required under sub. (2) (a) as a precondition to receipt of a grant, except as authorized in sub. (2) (h) or (i).

SB26, s. 39 Section 39. 11.60 (3) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB26,16,10 11.60 (3) Notwithstanding sub. (1), any person, including any committee or group, who makes any contribution or expenditure in violation of this chapter may be required to forfeit treble the amount of the contribution or portion thereof which is illegally unlawfully contributed or treble the amount of the expenditure or portion thereof which is unlawfully disbursed.

SB26, s. 40 Section 40. Nonstatutory provisions legislative findings. The legislature, drawing on its collective experience with campaigns for public office and on the independent evidence presented to it by qualified analysts, finds and declares that:

SB26,16,16 (1)  Wisconsin has historically experienced a high level of civic participation in responsible government, which however is now in decline as the direct result of campaign financing arrangements that have the clear tendency to distance voters from the electoral process, and that cannot be successfully corrected under applicable rulings of the U.S. supreme court.

SB26,16,21 (2)  Current campaign financing arrangements, with their perceived preferential access to lawmakers for special interests that are capable of contributing sizeable sums to lawmakers' campaigns, have provoked public disaffection with elective government, as manifested by declines in voting percentages and in Wisconsin election campaign fund participation. 

SB26,17,3 (3)  The Wisconsin election campaign fund system has lost popular support because it does not diminish the perceived preferential access of the special interests and is therefore judged to be ineffective.

SB26,17,6 (4)  Before 1976, Wisconsin in company with 33 other states had these matters under regulatory control through a system of mandatory spending limits applicable to all candidates for state elective office.

SB26,17,8 (5)  In 1976, the U.S. supreme court, in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, invalidated all such spending limits while approving campaign contribution limits.

SB26,17,11 (6)  Since that time campaign expenditures have risen steeply, doubling in Wisconsin legislative races since 1980. The addition has been made up principally by contributions from special interests.

SB26,17,14 (7)  Contribution limits are inadequate by themselves to check this trend. So long as spending is effectively unrestrained, contributions will find ways to protect favored candidates from being outspent.

SB26,17,17 (8)  Among such ways have been personal spending by wealthy candidates, independent expenditures that favor or oppose an identified candidate, and the use of political parties as conduits for the support of selected candidates.

SB26,17,23 (9)  Experience shows in particular that so-called "independent" support — whether by individuals, committees, or other entities — can be coordinated with a candidate's campaign, by means of informal "understandings", without losing its professedly independent character. Likewise, contributions to a political party for ostensible "party-building" purposes can be and are routed, by design, to the support of identified candidates.

SB26,18,3 (10)  Public financing cannot cure the problem so long as spending limits are so readily evadable. After 15 years of experience with the present law, and a 42% decline in Wisconsin election campaign fund designations, it has become evident that Wisconsin voters await some successful repair of the campaign finance system before they will give it their financial support.

SB26,18,9 (11)  The legislature agrees with the 1992 finding of the California commission on campaign financing, made after 8 years of study, that an effective remedy to this problem requires the reconsideration of Buckley v. Valeo. The legislature believes with that commission that it is "strongly desirable to present the [Supreme] Court with carefully researched data and arguments so that it can consider upholding reasonable spending limitations." This act is a step in that direction.

SB26,18,14 (12)  The supreme court based its Buckley decision on a concern that spending limits could restrict political speech, "by reducing the number of issues discussed, the depth of their exploration, and the size of the audience reached." The experience of those engaged in the electoral process is otherwise. It is unlimited expenditure that can drown or distort political discourse, in a flood of distractive repetition.

SB26,18,18 (13)  The least distorted and most instructive channels of campaign communication are often free or inexpensive: debates, call-in programs, local interviews, and other voter connections that are not dependent on the power of money.

SB26,18,22 (14)  The expanded use of such low-cost channels, stimulated by the adoption of sensible spending limits, would benefit political discourse by drawing candidates out of the packaged world of media advertisements and into the real world of voter engagement and accountability.

SB26,19,2 (15)  Turning down the noise level of campaign communication, through reasonable spending limits, increases the opportunity for newer and quieter voices to be heard. It tends to increase the number, depth and diversity of ideas presented to the public.

SB26,19,7 (16)  Finally, a reasonable limit on campaign spending relieves candidates and officeholders alike from the constant necessity of engaging in defensive fund raising, arising as this does from the continual risk of massively financed opposition challenges to everything they may say or do. The conduct both of campaigns and of office will be thereby improved.

SB26, s. 41 Section 41. Nonstatutory provisions; nonseverability.

SB26,19,11 (1)  This act shall be considered a unit and its provisions inseparable. Notwithstanding section 990.001 (11) of the statutes, if any provision of the statutes, as affected by this act, is declared unconstitutional, the entire act is void.

SB26, s. 42 Section 42. Initial applicability.

SB26,19,14 (1)  The treatment of section 11.31 (9) of the statutes first applies to adjustment of expenditure limitations for the biennium beginning on January 1, 1997.

SB26, s. 43 Section 43. Effective date.

SB26,19,16 (1)  This act takes effect on January 1, 1997.

SB26,19,17 (End)