The bill makes only minor adjustments to the campaign reporting schedule. These adjustments will continue to allow candidates to sneak controversial money into their campaigns shortly before an election but not report it until after the vote. The bill would require large contributors to report their occupations, a helpful move in tracing where a candidate's money originates, but it does not require the reporting of the contributor's employer. By refusing to fully tighten the employer disclosure, the House committee created another loophole as big as the current one. In short, the new loophole makes the occupation improvement meaningless, and could lead to distortions in contributor reporting.
Fault lies with what the bill fails to address as much as with what it addresses only feebly.
In arguing against the motion to send the bill back to committee, Rep. Connie Wilson, the Charlotte Republican who crafted the House version, argued that it had received full and fair consideration in committee. But that just is not true. Wilson ruled before the session that her committee would not consider public financing and she ruled shortly afterward that the committee would limit its reforms to better disclosure. She may have allowed full and fair debate on those issues, but she limited the number of campaign finance issues to be considered. The bill now goes to the House Ways and Means Committee where, it can only be hoped, the members are aware of the public sentiment for real reform in campaign-finance laws.