Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Campaign Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House adopts Personal Privacy Protection Act amid questions about donor disclosure
Summary
The House adopted the conference report for Senate Bill 416 (Personal Privacy Protection Act). On the floor representatives asked whether the measure could shield certain state‑level political donations by 501(c)(3) organizations, raising concerns about increasing 'dark money.' The adoption passed 63–46.
The North Carolina House on June 26 adopted the conference report for Senate Bill 416, the Personal Privacy Protection Act, after floor questions about its interaction with existing campaign‑finance disclosure laws.
Representative Sheetzell, who moved adoption, said the only change in the conference report was removal of certain IOLTA language. Representative Butler questioned whether the bill could shield political donations made by 501(c)(3) organizations if those organizations confined political activity to state‑level matters; Butler warned that could expand the amount of undisclosed political money active in state politics.
Representative Sheetzell responded that disclosures already required by Article 22A of Chapter 163 would not be changed by the bill and that donations already required to be disclosed would remain so, but he acknowledged that donations currently shielded by law would remain shielded unless the body amends the referenced disclosure statute.
The House adopted the conference report (clerk recorded 63 in the affirmative and 46 in the negative). The motion carries and the Senate will be notified; the enrolled bill will be transmitted to the governor.
Why it matters: Floor questioning focused on whether the bill increases the scope of shielded donors and could lead to more dark money at the state level if organizations structure activity narrowly to remain state‑level. Next steps: The bill will be enrolled and transmitted to the governor; stakeholders and watchdogs are likely to analyze the enacted language against current disclosure statutes.
