Progressives often fantasize that the public is behind them, and what's stopping utopia is that there's too much political speech by corporations. Hence their obsession with reversing Citizens United, the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling that the government can't ban political books or movies before an election.
Another attempt is on the ballot next week in Michigan. Proposal 2 is billed as a measure to curb the electoral influence of "regulated electric and gas utilities" and public contractors -- though not government unions. The fine print is that it would amend the law in ways likely to chill political speech, potentially by nonprofit think tanks or even independent journalists.
Michigan already regulates campaign spending that expressly advocates for or against a candidate's election. Under Prop. 2, the definition of "expenditure" would be expanded to cover an amorphous category of communication that "promotes, supports, attacks, or opposes" a candidate. Spending over $500 in that ill-defined domain could trigger a requirement to register as a political committee, according to the Institute for Free Speech.
Prop. 2 also would define an "electioneering communication" as any message that "references" an identifiable candidate in the 100 days before a general election, or 30 days for a primary, in which that person appears on the ballot. Anyone spending $5,000 on such speech would be required to file a state report disclosing the "name, address, occupation, employer, and principal place of business of each person that contributed $100.01 or more."
Think tanks and other nonprofits might find themselves subject to these rules if they spend money to publish a voter guide or promote a legislative scorecard. While Michigan exempts traditional news coverage from campaign regulation, imagine a reporting startup that has a scoop on a local candidate's bad behavior. If it pays for digital ads to get new eyeballs on its negative story, is Michigan suddenly going to consider that electioneering?
Or if Prop. 2 becomes law, given this uncertainty about its vague yet sweeping terms, will some Michiganders conclude that the legally safest move is to shut up? Failing to file a required state report for more than 30 days could be a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to $1,000, three months of jail, or both. Groups that don't have lawyers on retainer might decide to delete language even if it merely "references" candidates.
The ballot measure is sponsored by Michiganders for Money out of Politics, an amusing name because the push for Prop. 2 is being supported by out-of-state groups such as All Hands on Deck Network, a Massachusetts outfit whose public 990 tax form describes it as dedicated to "national progressive policy advocacy." Readers can ponder why coastal Democrats might want to drain only certain "Money" out of Michigan's swing-state politics.
The left has sought for years to put political controls on the rough and tumble of democratic debate. Progressives are willing to try anything, including wild donor disclosure demands to conservative nonprofits, an idea that lost at the Supreme Court in 2021. Prop. 2 is more of the same strategy, and if it passes Michigan should be ready for a First Amendment fight.
(END)