Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.


Campaign-spending disclosure: How Minnesota, other states rank

This story was originally published by , which is a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative news organization in Washington, D.C.

The National Institute on Money In State Politics graded each state by the strength of its independent spending disclosure laws through April 2013. It looked at:

  • Does the state require reporting of independent expenditures, political spending that urges voters to support or oppose a candidate but is not coordinated with the campaign?
  • Does the state require reporting of the target, the identity of the candidate who is the subject of the independent spending?
  • Does the state require reporting of position, whether the spending supports or opposes the target
  • How does the state monitor "electioneering communications" -- advertising that airs close to an election that names a candidate but does not urge viewers to vote for or against the candidate?

SCALE: A=100-90 B=89-80 C=79-70 D=69-60 F=59 or less.

How did your state score?

Methodology: To calculate each state’s score, the National Institute on Money in State Politics awards points for “independent expenditures” (IEs) and “electioneering communications” (ECs). Thirty points is awarded when IEs are required to be disclosed. Ten points are awarded for identification of the targets of the spending and 10 points for whether the sponsors support or oppose the target. The same scoring pattern applies to ECs. Partial credit is given when disclosure is required in only some instances or only by certain types of filers.

Copyright 2013 The Center for Public Integrity

No comments yet

Leave a Reply