Donate, but do it in the light

Generally speaking, better disclosure of political contributions should be regarded as a societal benefit, particularly as American politics is fueled by an ever-increasing amount of money.

The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision early this year determined that the government cannot ban or limit business interests and unions from contributing to political campaigns. That opens the doors for more money in politics, which is not automatically a bad thing. Even companies — which are regulated and taxed by the government after all — should not be constrained in their ability to engage in the political process.

But the fear that corporate money will dominate political races should not be taken lightly, especially in a state like Montana which saw the absolute political power wielded by the copper kings and the Anaconda Co.

Therefore, we must be sure that not just the right of free speech is upheld, but also the right to free and fair elections. The Citizens United ruling is not incompatible with the need for transparency.

Yet neither is transparency going to prevent dirty politics. In this age of mass media and anonymous blogging, it is just as easy as ever to get a phony rumor going, and to tar candidates with innuendo and hearsay.

Plus, once political contributors are all revealed, they will be subject to organized boycotts and protests which may have the effect of chilling their free speech.

We’ve seen some of this play out in recent weeks as the Obama administration and the Democratic Party have targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, alleging that the organization includes foreign money in its contributions to domestic campaigns. The chamber denies it and The New York Times found that it is not true. But that didn’t mean they weren’t subject to a lot of heat.

The point here is that that disclosure laws can be used by political parties to intimidate those who contribute to their opposition. That was the case earlier this year when the Target Corporation contributed to a Republican gubernatorial candidate, only to have a progressive group organize and advertise a boycotts of the company’s stores.

But still, we in Montana understand more than most just why citizens want to know who and what is behind political action committees and other organizations that get involved in state and local races.