Opinion ID: 6498151
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Montana’s Disclosure Law

Text: Montana’s election law requires candidates and political committees to file periodic reports of expenditures with the Commissioner of Political Practices. Mont. Code Ann. § 1337-225. The statute defines a political committee as “a combination of two or more individuals or a person other than an individual who receives a contribution or makes an expenditure” for one of three purposes: (1) “to support or oppose a candidate or a committee organized to support or oppose a candidate or a petition for nomination”; (2) “to support or oppose a ballot issue or a committee organized to support or oppose a ballot issue”; or (3) “to prepare or disseminate an election communication, an electioneering communication, or an independent expenditure.” Id. § 13- 1-101(32)(a). Political committees must file certifications with the Commissioner within five days of making an expenditure. Id. § 13-37-201(2)(b). Montana excludes from its definition of political committee any combination of individuals that makes an independent expenditure of $250 or less. Id. § 13-1-101(32)(d). Montana defines an “expenditure” as “a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, promise, pledge, or gift of money or anything of value” that is “made by a candidate BUTCHER V. KNUDSEN 35 or political committee to support or oppose a candidate or a ballot issue.” Id. § 13-1-101(19)(a). However, an expenditure falls into the de minimis category if it is “so small that it does not trigger registration, reporting, disclaimer, or disclosure obligations . . . or warrant enforcement as a campaign practices violation.” Id. § 13-1- 101(11). The Commissioner is authorized to adopt rules that “define what constitutes de minimis acts, contributions, or expenditures.” Mont. Code Ann. § 13-37-114. An Administrative Rule promulgated under the statute provides:
following factors in determining whether specific acts, contributions, or expenditures are de minimis and therefore do not trigger registration, reporting, attribution, or disclosure requirements, or warrant enforcement as a campaign practices violation:
expenditure has an ascertainable fair market value, and if so the amount of that value;
provision of services, whether the act results in either a detriment to the provider of the services, such as an out- of-pocket expense or the preclusion of other activities; 36 BUTCHER V. KNUDSEN
expenditure at issue is a single, one-time event or occurrence or multiple events or occurrences;
campaign practices violation deprives the public of disclosure;
similarly showing limited value or minimal harm. Mont. Admin. R. 44.11.603(1). The Rule provides a non-exclusive list of contributions that may be de minimis:
may, depending on the circumstances, be considered de minimis include:
communications or digital photos or video, on a voluntary (unpaid) basis by an individual, including the creation and outgoing content development and delivery of social media on the internet or by telephone;
political committee of personal property, food, or services with a cumulative fair market value of less than $50 in the aggregate for any single election; BUTCHER V. KNUDSEN 37
lawn or yard signs on real property, but only if the property owner does not normally and does not in fact charge a fee for display of signs;
campaign bumper stickers or signs on a vehicle, but only if the vehicle owner does not normally and does not in fact charge a fee for display of bumper stickers or signs;
erroneous information on a campaign finance report that is determined not to be misleading or that does not substantially affect disclosure;
attribution requirements of [Mont. Code Ann. § 13-35-225] that is determined to nevertheless provide sufficient disclosure regarding who made or financed the communication;
services or efforts, including the cost of gas, parking, and meals. Id. at 44.11.603(2) (emphasis added). Based on Mont. Admin. R. 44.11.603(2)(g), italicized above, Butcher and Bergstrom argue that the Montana law is unconstitutionally vague. 38 BUTCHER V. KNUDSEN