Ahead of its vote on a bill to restrict political donations in state elections, members of the House’s multipartisan majority rejected a series of amendments that would have expanded the bill.
Among the rejected proposals were ideas to require greater disclosure of donations funneled through so-called dark money groups enabled by the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision known as Citizens United.
The rejected amendments, from Rep. Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, would have required prompt disclosure of donations to independent expenditure groups, required advertising disclosures, and sought to limit out-of-state contributions to groups backing ballot measures. Federal courts have struck down Alaska’s limits on out-of-state contributions to candidates.
Previous bills dealing with independent expenditures haven’t advanced to a floor vote, making the rejected amendments significant.
Inverting the usual pattern, Republican lawmakers proposed the restrictions, and they were defeated by the votes of independents and Democrats.
Speaking on the House floor, McCabe called the lack of disclosure rules for third-party groups “a critical loophole” in state law.
Traditionally in Alaska, Republicans have supported actions to reduce limits on campaign contributions. The Republican Governors Association has repeatedly challenged disclosure rules imposed by voters in a 2020 ballot measure, and a Republican-backed lawsuit led to the elimination of Alaska’s campaign finance limits in 2022.
A ballot measure scheduled for Alaska’s 2026 elections would reimpose some limits, but if House Bill 16 becomes law, those limits would come into effect ahead of the election.
McCabe argued that HB 16 should be extended to cover independent expenditures, not just direct donations.
“Independent expenditure groups have become a big part of our political campaigns,” he said, speaking on one of his amendments.
Other lawmakers noted that most of the political mailers that filled Alaskans’ mailboxes last year were from independent expenditure groups, not politicians’ campaigns.
“Voters deserve to know who is funding the message,” McCabe said.
Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage and a sponsor of the ballot measure and HB 16, was among the lawmakers who voted against the dark-money amendments.
“I think there is concern amongst the Alaskan public around both contribution limits and independent expenditure spending. However, the dire concern is really around the hole around campaign finance, and so to the maximum extent possible, my efforts were to try and keep the bill constrained to what was approved through the ballot measure, and to address the campaign finance portion of this,” Schrage said.
Under the Alaska Constitution, a law can replace a ballot measure only if the underlying bill is “substantially similar” to the ballot measure.
In addition to the dark-money amendments, the House rejected a proposal to exempt most municipal elections from campaign-finance reporting requirements, and an amendment that would have prevented the recipients of state contracts — and their family members — from donating to political campaigns.
That amendment was almost identical to a bill rejected by Hawaii’s Legislature on the same day that the Alaska House turned down the idea. Several states, including New Jersey, have so-called “pay for play” disclosure rules; the amendment proposed by Rep. Sarah Vance, R-Homer, would have gone further by actually restricting donations.
Schrage said it went too far.
“With that specific amendment, I think my biggest concern was around the fact that family members would be prohibited from making donations to political campaigns,” Schrage said. “The courts have been pretty clear that we need to be careful about limiting people’s free speech, and thanks to Citizens United, political spending is considered free speech.”
In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission eliminated restrictions on spending by political groups unaffiliated with a particular politician. Since then, the amount of money spent by independent groups has significantly increased. So has the role of dark money contributions — money funneled through independent groups in order to conceal the identity of the donor.
A ballot measure approved by Alaska voters in 2020 requires independent groups to disclose the “true source” of their contributions, but that measure has exemptions: It doesn’t cover ballot measure groups, for example.
Schrage said some of the rejected ideas could show up in separate legislation, but he wanted to keep HB 16 confined to the ballot measure that’s ready for a vote in 2026.
“There’s always this question of, how much do you try to do, and how much can you fit into a bill before it becomes too heavy and too controversial to make it through the process. There is a very strong desire from Alaskans to address our campaign contribution limits, and we have a very clear proposal before us. I wanted to move forward,” he said.
Alaska Beacon is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com.
