The Montana state flag flies alongside the American flag.
HELENA, Mont. – Montana has labeled businesses as “artificial persons” in accepting a novel ballot initiative that keeps them from donating to political campaigns.
The group Transparent Election Initiative introduced the Montana Plan to keep “dark money” out of politics. The wording of the ballot initiative was the subject of a few trips to the state Supreme Court before Election Day, when voters overwhelmingly approved it.
Being an “artificial person” means that under state law a company is prohibited from expending money or anything of value to influence the outcome of a vote of the electorate.
“Montana is now the second state after Hawaii to redefine corporate law so that corporations are no longer granted the power to spend in the state’s politics,” said Tom Moore, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.
“These pioneering states are setting a bold example for other states to follow suit, sending a powerful message that we don’t have to give corporations unlimited power.”
Attorney General Austin Knudsen had to refine the language in the initiative after deciding that having only corporations identified in the initiative’s wording would be misleading to voters. That’s because it would also apply to nonprofits, trusts, trade associations and labor unions, among other entities.
The ballot initiative was called the “Montana Plan” and is a project of TEI and founder Jeff Mangan. TEI calls it a first-of-its-kind effort to keep “secret-donor money” out of the state’s elections.
TEI is a group dedicated to fighting against the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which held that corporate spending on political issues is protected under the First Amendment.
Groups like the Montana Mining Association and the Montana Chamber of Commerce fought the initiative, saying it violates the free speech rights of corporations, as it would prohibit them from spending money or “anything of value” on political matters.
Before the election, the Chamber warned that family-owned businesses like farms and ranches would no longer be able to participate in the political process. A restaurant couldn’t support measures to improve public safety, it said, while out-of-state individuals pushing their agendas on Montana could.
“I-194 should be called the ‘California Plan’ since California is home to more than 200 individual billionaires and places no restrictions whatsoever on out-of-state wealthy individuals,” the Chamber said.
“Under I-194, a single well-funded outsider could bankroll a campaign to devastate a Montana agricultural practice, a logging operation, or a ranching family, while the Montana businesses under attack would be legally silenced.
“That is not campaign finance reform. That is a one-sided disarmament of Montana’s own voices.”
