Brief⁽¹⁾

The bill would amend the Campaign Finance Act. Specifically, the bill would include in the definition of "express advocacy":

• communications that in context could have no other reasonable meaning than to support or oppose the election or defeat of a specific candidate, or

• communications that when taken as a whole and with limited reference to external events could only be interpreted to advocate the election or defeat of a specific candidate. Such communications would have to be clear by virtue of being unmistakable and unambiguous and because reasonable people could not differ regarding whether the communication clearly encouraged the election or defeat of a specific candidate.

Under current campaign finance laws, many provisions requiring filing of reports and making disclosures apply only to communications that expressly advocate the nomination, election, or defeat of a clearly identified candidate.

The bill also would change the crime of corrupt political advertising as it applies to individuals by lowering the expenditure threshold to $100 from the current $2,500 which triggers the requirement that the name of an individual responsible for publication be printed on a flier or brochure. Other aspects of the crime would be unchanged.

The bill would make corrupt political advertising by any individual, trust, committee, corporation, partnership, organization, or association within 60 days of an election a class C misdemeanor. Corrupt political advertising by candidates, candidate committees, or party committees at any time would continue to be a class C misdemeanor.

Finally, the bill would remove candidate committees and party committees from the definition of political committee (PAC). Party and candidate committees were not included in the PAC definition prior to the 1998 amendment of the campaign finance law.

Background

Supporters of the bill at the hearing held by the House Committee on Governmental Organization and Elections included the bill's sponsor, Representative Jenkins; Representative Gregory; and the Kansans National Education Association. A representative of Kansas for Life presented testimony in opposition to the bill.

The fiscal note prepared by the Division of the Budget states that the impact of any additional workload of county and district attorneys cannot be determined and that the bill would not have any fiscal impact on the state.

1. *Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at http://www.ink.org/public/legislative/bill_search.html.