The group is challenging state limits on the right of groups and individuals to support campaigns for and against ballot questions.

01:00 AM EST on Friday, November 19, 2004

BY BRUCE LANDIS
Journal Staff Writer

PROVIDENCE -- The Rhode Island Affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union went to court yesterday to challenge state rules on campaign contributions and spending on ballot questions like the ones in this month's election.

The group said the state is violating the U.S. Constitution by limiting the right of groups and individuals to spend money campaigning for and against ballot questions. It said it is challenging elements of state law and their interpretation by the state Board of Elections, which administers the state campaign finance reporting system.

ACLU Executive Director Steven Brown said the lawsuit, filed in federal court, asserts that the U.S. Supreme Court has already held unconstitutional two provisions of state law, one prohibiting corporate contributions for ballot question advocacy and another limiting contributions from others wanting to support or oppose referendum questions.

The ACLU is also challenging a Board of Elections policy, scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, that would require groups like the ACLU to form political action committees if they get involved in referendum politics. That would make them subject to reporting requirements and contribution limitations.

Richard Thornton, the Board of Elections' supervising accountant, said yesterday that he had been asking various groups for information about their campaign contributions. He said he had sent a letter to the ACLU on Wednesday asking about a flier the group had put out on one of the ballot questions that seemed to him to be "clearly advocacy."

But Thornton said some of the rules that determine which groups must report what information remain "muddled" and need to be clarified, perhaps by the Board of Elections or the General Assembly.

A major goal of the campaign finance rules is to make public who is spending money to influence election outcomes, and where their money comes from. They do that by requiring political groups to report their contributions and expenditures.

The ACLU lawsuit addresses issues that are already a cause of dispute and confusion, partly because of possible conflicts in the law.

For example, Thornton noted, the law defines a "person" to include corporations as well as individuals. But while the law bars corporate contributions to politicians' campaign committees, it lets "persons" spend money on campaigns in some circumstances.

Both the Board of Elections and a citizen advocacy group, Operation Clean Government, say they are looking into whether groups failed to report their campaign spending or reported it improperly during this year's election campaign.

The stakes are high, because the ballot questions, which go to the voters every other year, can range from authorizing state borrowing for huge highway projects to approving fundamental changes in state government, like the separation of powers amendment to the state Constitution that the voters approved this year.

Twelve bond issues totaling $392 million in spending also went before the voters. Most of them were approved, but the voters turned down new athletic facilities at the University of Rhode Island, renovation of the Cranston Street Armory in Providence and renovations of state offices in the Pastore Complex, in Cranston. Ten groups reported spending in support or opposition to various ballot questions.

Meanwhile, the issue that could be the 800-pound gorilla in this arena, a referendum vote on casino gambling in Rhode Island, is still around, although the state Supreme Court knocked it off the ballot for this election.

As the rules stand now, Thornton said, a casino-backer like Harrah's Entertainment might be able to spend unlimited amounts of money on a pro-gambling campaign.