Despite having some of the most lax campaign finance laws in the country, the Indiana General Assembly in 1999 failed to even hold hearings on significant campaign finance reform. Governor Frank O’Bannon introduced a modest proposal for contribution limits and increased disclosure; unfortunately, the chair of the House Elections Committee, Rep Tom Kromkowski refused to give the bill a hearing. This is especially frustrating given the fact that campaign finance spending is increasing every election cycle in Indiana. In 1996, we had the most expensive race for Governor in the nation.

It will be difficult to get the legislature focused on the complicated and controversial issue of comprehensive campaign finance reform during a short legislative session. Therefore, CAC and other reform advocates are setting their sights on some critical incremental reform efforts in 2000.

At the federal level and in many states, contributors of large contributions are required to disclose their occupation and employer. This information is important because it helps the public understand where a large contributor’s economic interest(s) lie. In 1997, when the Indiana General Assembly passed legislation to improve campaign finance disclosure, they included language to require contributors of $1000 or more to a single entity to disclose their occupation. This language has resulted in little meaningful information being provided to the public for two reasons. First, $1000 is too high of a threshold, especially for legislative candidates. Most legislative candidates almost never receive contributions that large in a single check. Second, the disclosure of "occupation" without the disclosure of "employer" is almost meaningless. For example, John Doe, attorney, provides far less insight into John Doe’s economic interest than John Doe, attorney for XYZ corporation or John Doe, attorney at Smith, Jones and Brown law firm. Currently, CAC and other reform advocates are looking for a legislator to sponsor a bill which would lower the disclosure threshold to $200 and require that employer, as well as occupation, is revealed.

We also expect bills to be filed in both the House and Senate to undo a recent decision made by the Indiana Election Commission (IEC). These bills would allow state candidates to reimburse themselves from campaign funds for wages or salary lost while campaigning. While CAC is sensitive that such a provision might make it easier for those of limited means to run for political office, we are concerned that this practice could become a very slippery slope. Indiana already has very weak laws governing what candidates can spend their campaign dollars on and this issue muddies the water even further.

While these issues are important to cleaning up political campaigns in Indiana, they do not address the major concerns that citizens have about campaign financing. People are most concerned that campaigns cost too much money, distracting our elected officials from their official duties and preventing many good candidates from even running. The public is also concerned that the bulk of money comes from narrow special interests. These issues will not be addressed until the public demands that the legislature deals with them. Consistently, the Indiana General Assembly claims they don’t pass campaign finance reform because they never hear from their constituents about the need to do so. This is ironic, given the widespread public support which exists for campaign finance reform.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Contact your State Senator, State Representative, and Governor O’Bannon with the messsage: "I vote and I care about campaign finance reform. What are you going to do the reduce the influence of big contributors in Indiana elections?"

Go to Campaign Finance Issues Index

| CAC Home Page | Table of Contents | Issues Index |
| Contact CAC | Join CAC | CAC Newsletter | Resource Links |