Virginia committee advances ‘trigger’ campaign-finance bill tied to end of Citizens United
Loading...
Summary
A Virginia Senate committee reported SB 688, a 'trigger' bill that would impose contribution and expenditure limits only if Citizens United were overturned; members adopted a reenactment amendment that removes immediate expenditure caps and voted 8–7 to report the bill as amended.
A Senate committee in Richmond on Thursday advanced SB 688, a bill that would establish statewide campaign contribution and spending limits only if the Attorney General certifies that Citizens United v. FEC is no longer in force.
The bill’s sponsor told the panel the measure is designed as a “trigger” that becomes enforceable if and when the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision is overturned or the Constitution is amended. The sponsor outlined proposed limits in the bill, including bans on corporate contributions and numeric caps for statewide, Senate, and House campaigns and annual party spending limits.
Proponents framed the measure as a symbolic and practical step toward limiting big-money influence in Virginia. Jay Swanson of the Brennan Center told the committee the bill “adopts a proven strategy for pushing for the overturning of wrongly decided cases like Citizens United” and described the proposal as part of a long-term campaign finance reform effort. Mary Crutchfield of the League of Women Voters said the league “strongly supports legislation that puts limits to campaign contributions and expenditures.” Nancy Morgan of Big Money Out urged lawmakers to recognize earlier Supreme Court decisions like Buckley v. Valeo when considering the bill’s legal footing.
Opponents and some members pushed back on the specific dollar limits and on whether expenditure caps should be part of the bill. Committee members asked how the sponsor arrived at figures such as a $7,000,000 cap for statewide candidates and whether limits would create unequal effects across expensive media markets. The sponsor said the numbers are rough estimates and offered to accept a reenactment clause or line amendments to address concerns.
During floor questioning, members asked whether definitions in the bill — for example, which types of political committees would be covered — should be clarified by referencing existing campaign finance statutes. One member of Americans for Prosperity warned of donor privacy and disclosure consequences for advocacy groups if the trigger provisions took effect.
The committee adopted a line amendment striking the expenditure-cap language (lines 23–33) and added a reenactment-like approach for that portion. After the amendment, the panel moved to report the bill; the clerk announced the committee report result as 8–7 in favor of reporting SB 688 as amended.
The committee’s action moves SB 688 forward in the legislative process; the bill would not go into effect until the condition described in the enactment clause — the end or superseding of Citizens United — occurs, according to the sponsor’s presentation.
