Balgarianovinite.com
While federal courts are considering cases that could alter national campaign finance practices, voters in a handful of states will have a direct say on changes to laws governing election funding when they cast ballots in November.
Of the 93 measures currently set to appear on ballots across 35 states, four in Alaska, California and Missouri focus specifically on campaign finance. These measures address policies such as repealing dark money disclosure requirements, establishing new contribution limits, authorizing public campaign financing and banning foreign contributions to ballot measure campaigns.
Alaskans to consider repealing anti-dark-money laws
A ballot initiative currently referred to as 24ESEG would repeal requirements to disclose the true source of contributions, as well as the state’s top-four ranked-choice voting system, which were both approved by voters in 2020.
Ballot Measure 2, as the 2020 initiative was known, prohibited individuals or groups from giving or receiving more than $2,000 in dark money, defined as funds whose original sources are not disclosed, including money passed through intermediaries. The law requires disclosure of the “true source” of contributions – meaning the individual or entity who made the donation through funds derived from wages, investment income, inheritance or business revenue.
The initiative to repeal Ballot Measure 2 was sponsored by Repeal Now, led by former state Rep. Ken McCarty (R); Judy Eledge, former Anchorage deputy library director; and Bernadette Wilson, a conservative activist currently campaigning for governor.
Repeal Now reported $263,352 in contributions through Jan. 7, with nearly $200,000 coming from Aurora Action Network, a super PAC based in Wisconsin. Aurora Action Network raised $524,250 through 2025, including $325,000 from billionaire megadonor Jeff Yass. The group has tapped a number of other wealthy donors, such Elizabeth Uihlein, the billionaire co-owner of Uline who donated $10,000.
Another committee, Real Repeal, registered to support the ballot measure to repeal ranked choice voting and campaign disclosure requirements but had not yet reported receiving any contributions.
As of April 14, no committees had formed to officially oppose the measure.
Alaska could become 39th state to adopt contribution limits
Another measure, referred to as 23RCF2, would create campaign contribution limits. Under the initiative, individuals could donate up to $2,000 each election cycle to a candidate or to a non-group entity influencing the election of a candidate, as well as $5,000 per year to a political party or other group. Groups that are not political parties would be authorized to contribute up to $4,000 per election cycle to a candidate and up to $5,000 per year to another group, non-group entity, or political party. Contributions to a joint campaign for governor and lieutenant governor would be limited to $4,000 each election cycle for individuals and $8,000 for groups.
The contribution limits proposed by the measure would be adjusted for inflation every 10 years beginning in 2031.
If approved, the measure would make Alaska the 39th state to adopt limits on how much money an individual can donate to a state candidate. Alaska’s campaign finance limits were invalidated in 2021.
In 2006, Alaskans approved Measure 1 with 73% of voters in favor to limit individual contributions to state candidates, political groups and parties to $500 per year. The limits were struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in 2021. The court found the limit to be too low to allow for meaningful expression of speech and therefore in violation of the First Amendment.
The measure is being supported by Citizens Against Money in Politics, led by Bruce Botelho, a Democrat who served as state attorney general and mayor of Juneau; David Monson, owner of Trail Breaker Kennel; and nonpartisan state Rep. Calvin Schrage.
Citizens Against Money in Politics has raised $111,384, with top donors including the left-leaning nonprofit group New Venture Fund, the Alaska National Education Association, and labor groups Alaska AFL-CIO and ASEA/AFSCME Local. The committee filed its last campaign finance report on April 7, with no plans to reactivate the committee to advocate for the measure’s passage.
Bruce Botelho of Citizens Against Money in Politics told OpenSecrets that if the Alaska State Legislature gives final approval to House Bill 16, a bill to enact campaign contribution limits similar to the limits contained in the proposed initiative, the initiative would be removed from the ballot. The House passed the bill on April 28, in a vote of 22-18, with 14 Democrats, five independents, and three Republicans voting in support. All votes against the bill came from Republican legislators.
“[The bill] has passed our state House and is currently being held in [the Senate rules committee]. “The requisite votes are there in the Senate, but there is substantial concern that the governor will veto the measure,” Botelho said. “If the Legislature fails to act or the governor vetoes the bill, there will be no active campaign” advocating for passage of the ballot measure.
“We simply don’t have access to financial resources to run a credible campaign – especially in light of our statewide races for U.S. Senate, our Congressional seat and open governor’s seat,” he said. “The Senate race itself is expected to suck most of the air out of the room with expected expenditures exceeding $50 million. What little polling has been done (none by us) indicates that the measure has broad support. That’s certainly consistent with the public’s last opportunity to vote [in 2006] when [over] 70% voted [to establish] caps.”
He previously discussed the measure with the Alaska Beacon, “Our experience has been that people, regardless of where they align on the political spectrum, are troubled by the influence of unlimited money in campaigns for candidates,” he said.
So far, no one has organized a committee to oppose the measure.
California voters may repeal ban on public financing for campaigns
The California State Legislature referred a statute to the November 2026 ballot that would repeal the 1988 ban on public campaign financing. If the measure is approved, state and local governments would be authorized to establish programs for public financing of campaigns.
Currently, 14 states and Washington, D.C. provide for public campaign financing for certain offices.
California Clean Money Action Fund, California Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of California launched the Californians for Fair Elections committee to support the measure. Other members of the support coalition include labor groups ACLU, AFSCME, California Nurses Association, and California Labor Federation. As of April 10, 2026, the committee had received one donation of $10,000 from Democratic Assemblymember Alex Lee.
“Democracy works best when everyone has a voice in our state’s future, not just the wealthy and well-connected,” said Darius Kemp, Common Cause’s California executive director. “The California Fair Elections Act is a pro-voter reform that opens the door for teachers, nurses, small business owners, and community leaders to run competitive campaigns and win. This is how we build a democracy that reflects all of California.”
The California Taxpayers Association opposes the measure, arguing public money should not fund elections.
“People when they pay taxes want to pay for schools, fire departments, libraries, roads, that sort of thing,” David Kline, the association’s vice president of communications and research, told LAist. “The last thing they want to pay for is a negative political ad that is going to hit them on the radio or TV during election season.”
Missouri to vote on banning foreign spending on ballot measures
Voters in Missouri will decide on Amendment 4, which would amend the state’s constitution to prohibit foreign nationals and foreign adversaries from making contributions or expenditures to support or oppose a statewide ballot measure. Amendment 4 would also make it harder for voters to adopt citizen initiatives, by requiring a majority vote in each congressional district, rather than a simple statewide majority. It would also reduce penalties for petition fraud from $10,000 to $1,000.
In 2025, Missouri enacted a law, Senate Bill 152, to prohibit foreign nationals and foreign governments from contributing to ballot measure committees, requiring committees to obtain affirmation from donors that they are not a foreign national for all contributions over $2,000. Violations under the law include civil penalties and statutory damages. If the proposed constitutional amendment is passed, violations would be punishable by up to one year in jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000.
Candidates for office are prohibited by federal law from receiving contributions from foreign individuals or entities. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that ballot measure campaigns are similar to issue advocacy and, thus, the prohibition does not apply to those campaigns. As of 2026, 24 states had enacted laws banning foreign nationals or governments from donating to ballot measure committees.
The measure goes to the voters after winning a near-party-line vote in the Republican-led legislature.
Support for Amendment 4 is being led by Protect MO Voters, which has raised $100,104, with $100,000 from Trails West Inc., a nonprofit group with a mission of “promoting and defending the principles of limited government, individual liberty, free enterprise, and traditional family values.”
The committee leading the opposition to Amendment 4, Missourians for Fair Governance, has raised $200,000, all from the Missouri Association of Realtors. The association used the initiative process in 2010 to prohibit sales taxes on real estate transfers, and later in 2016 to prohibit new sales taxes on service or activity that was not subject to sales and use tax as of 2015.
Scott Charton, spokesman for the Missouri Association of Realtors, said, “It’s laughable for the legislature to try to peddle this flawed proposal as ‘reform’ when it actually reduces the current financial penalty for petition fraud by 90% and creates legal conflicts within the Constitution. The lawmakers are trying to make suckers out of Missouri voters, but our citizens are too smart to surrender their long-held constitutional rights and hand that power to politicians who don’t proofread their own legislation.”
Montanans may get a chance to eliminate dark money
Several other ballot measures could still be added to the ballot. One of them – “The Montana Plan” – offers a new tactic for eliminating dark money and banning corporations’ election spending.
The initiative, which was cleared to collect signatures on March 10, would amend state law to define the powers available to corporations and artificial entities and prohibit artificial entities from contributing to candidates, ballot measures and political parties.
The initiative is sponsored by Transparent Election Initiative and led by Jeff Mangan, a former Montana commissioner of political practices. “The Montana Plan uses the State’s authority to define what powers corporations get, effectively bypassing Citizens United by removing the power to spend before the question of rights even arises,” TEI states on its website.
On March 18, the Montana Chamber of Commerce and several industry groups (the Montana Mining Association, the Montana Chamber of Commerce, Montana Stockgrowers Association, Montana Petroleum Association, Montana Trucking Association, Montana Contractors Association, Treasure State Resource Association) filed a lawsuit in the state Supreme Court alleging the initiative violates state and federal law.
“Jeff Mangan is mounting a guns blazing, full frontal attack on the First Amendment with this,” said Charles Robison, general counsel for the Montana Chamber of Commerce. “This proposal would severely undermine the business climate in Montana and make it a place that’s unfriendly and hostile to doing business.”
Mangan countered: “This isn’t about protecting free speech. It’s about protecting the ability of big corporate interests to dominate our elections with money, while everyone else gets pushed aside. I hope every Montanan that sees this lawsuit will get a little bit upset, like I am.”
On April 1, the Montana Supreme Court dismissed the challenge, declining to go against precedent that prevents the attorney general from withholding proposed ballot measures based on challenges to its substantive constitutionality.
To qualify for the 2026 ballot, the group must submit 30,121 valid signatures by June 19.
2026 ballot measures: 4 reforms targeting campaign finance and dark money 2026 THE NEWS FROM BULGARIA – NEWS AGENCY 2009-2025 2026-04-14 13:32:40 Latest news World news Country news Most important news latest news most important latest of the day Justice Petar Nizamov Feathers Petar Nizamov- Feathers Justice bg iustitia.bg iustitia iusticia usticia investigation Burgas Bulgaria news news of the last hour news of the day news of today Bulgaria news The news from Bulgaria blitz news top news most important most commented latest news Boyko Borisov news weather coronavirus news news weather facebook youtube facebook instagram news today news of the last minutes news today today news news bg news leading news hot news bg news site for news all news news bg news of the last hour latest latest news bg news of today news today news today news of the last hour latest news today news bg news news 24 hours news vesti bg novini news world bird bg bivol bg bivol trud bg novini latest news today novinite bg news hello bulgaria political party coat of arms delyan peevski scandalous Bulgarian National Television Free Europe Television scandal exclusive live tv live right now tv tv online tv program bg live now tv news online tv online live court Burgas court Burgas district court Burgas court Burgas district court Burgas district court Burgas appellate court Burgas prosecutor Burgas prosecutor’s office Burgas district prosecutor’s office Burgas district prosecutor’s office Burgas district prosecutor’s office Burgas district prosecutor’s office Burgas district prosecutor’s office Burgas district prosecutor’s office Prosecutor General Ivan Geshev Prosecutor Geshev Tsatsarov Ministry of Internal Affairs Burgas ODMR Burgas ODPR Burgas police Burgas district police Burgas prosecutor Tsatsarov SGS cases Varna court chairman of the SGS court decisions on civil cases decisions on cases Plovdiv court decision of the court decisions cases Varna court criminal cases district district court decisions work in the court SGS chairman of the SGS judges Sofia court post judges Plovdiv court Plovdiv judges Plovdiv Supreme Court Inspectorate Supreme Court Supreme Judicial Council lawyer lawyer criminal cases lawyer civil cases lawyer marriage cases lawyer administrative criminal law criminal process civil law civil process administrative law constitutional law