.jpg){kind=link}
Montana voters have until 8 p.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 3, to return their ballots, and one of the questions at the bottom of this year’s ballot would change who is allowed to spend money in state elections.
Initiative 194, which backers call the Montana Plan, would bar what the measure calls “artificial persons” from spending money to support or oppose candidates, political parties or ballot issues. That category covers corporations, nonprofits, labor unions, limited liability companies, trusts and trade associations. Individuals, political committees, government bodies and news content are exempt.
If voters approve it, the law would take effect Jan. 1, 2027.
A different legal route
For most of the past century, Montana tried to keep corporate money out of its elections. A 1912 citizen initiative, passed with 76 percent of the vote during the era of the Copper Kings, banned corporate contributions and spending tied to candidates and parties. That law stood for 100 years. After the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010, the Montana Supreme Court tried to preserve it, but the U.S. Supreme Court struck it down in June 2012 in American Tradition Partnership v. Bullock. Montana voters responded that November by passing I-166, a statement of opposition to corporate personhood, by 75 percent to 25 percent.
I-194 takes a different approach. Rather than regulating speech directly, it rewrites the powers the state grants to entities when they are formed. Under the measure, an entity that spends on elections would forfeit its charter privileges, including limited liability. Getting those privileges back would require the entity to give up the money it spent, certify future compliance and meet any other conditions the state sets. The secretary of state would write the rules, and the attorney general could bring actions against violators.
Former Republican Gov. Marc Racicot, who supports the measure, argued in an endorsement that “by declining to hand out corporate political-spending powers from the outset, Montana can chart a constitutional course others may follow.” Opponents say it is an attempt to get around a settled Supreme Court ruling and will lead to litigation.
How it got on the ballot
The measure was filed Jan. 8 by Jeff Mangan, a former Montana Commissioner of Political Practices, and the Transparent Election Initiative leads the campaign for it. It needed 30,121 valid signatures. In June the all-volunteer campaign said it had turned in more than 50,000, and the secretary of state announced on Aug. 17 that it had qualified. It appears on the ballot as Ballot Issue 10.
Before that, a coalition of business groups, including the Montana Mining Association, the Montana Chamber of Commerce, the Billings and Kalispell chambers and the Montana Stockgrowers Association, asked the Montana Supreme Court to block it. On March 31 the court unanimously dismissed the case as premature, saying that ruling on the constitutional questions before the measure qualified “would be unquestionably advisory.” Those questions were left for another day.
Who is for it and who is against it
The opposition campaign, Montanans for Free Speech, argues that I-194 would keep businesses, nonprofits, cooperatives and trade groups out of ballot issue campaigns while placing no limits on wealthy individuals, including out-of-state billionaires. The Montana Republican Party also opposes it. Todd O’Hair, president and CEO of the Montana Chamber of Commerce, has warned that if it passes, “the business community will not be able to defend itself” against outside campaigns.
The supporters’ list crosses party lines. Along with Racicot, it includes former Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock, former U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, former U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the League of Women Voters of Montana and the Montana Farmers Union.
If voters approve it, a court challenge is widely expected. The real test of the Montana Plan may come in a courtroom in 2027.
The rest of the statewide ballot
Two proposed constitutional amendments, CI-132 and CI-133, are also on the statewide ballot. Voters should read the full text and the arguments for and against each one in the official voter information pamphlet published by the secretary of state.
One change from earlier this fall: on Oct. 6, District Judge Mike Menahan struck down a requirement that voters write their birth year on the ballot return envelope. Voters who have already signed and returned their envelopes do not need to do anything further.
Mailed ballots must be received by the county election office by 8 p.m. on Election Day. Postmarks do not count, so county officials have been urging voters who have not yet mailed their ballots to drop them off in person at a county election office or an official drop location instead. Voters can check their ballot status and find drop-off sites through the secretary of state’s My Voter Page at sosmt.gov.