Court tightens campaign rules

By Brad Shannon | The Olympian • Published September 14, 2007

The state Supreme Court took the side of state campaign-finance regulators Thursday in a case of secretly funded television ads that attacked attorney general candidate Deborah Senn in 2004.

At issue was the Public Disclosure Commission's insistence that the Voters Education Committee be registered as a political education committee and disclose its donors — which included a U.S. Chamber of Commerce contribution of $1.5 million.

The court rejected the free-speech claims the VEC based on arguments the definition of a political education committee was unconstitutionally vague. Justices also rejected requests to reimburse the VEC for its legal fees.

The ruling leaves the state Attorney General's Office free to seek penalties against the committee and chamber, and it appears the U.S. Chamber won't be targeted.

"The people have declared that it is the policy of the state of Washington that groups who sponsor political advertising must disclose their identities, contributions and expenditures," Justice Mary Fairhurst wrote in her 35-page opinion, which seven of the nine justices signed.

"Contrary to VEC's assertions, these disclosure requirements do not restrict free speech — they merely ensure that the public receives accurate information about who is doing the speaking," Fairhurst wrote.

Justice James Johnson wrote a dissenting opinion also signed by Justice Richard Sanders. Johnson questioned the PDC's determination that the ads were political speech that required disclosure, and he argued that the definition of a political committee was unconstitutionally vague.

Nature of the ads

The anti-Senn ads used newspaper headlines and a voice-over message to question her conduct as state insurance commissioner during the 1990s, asking whom she was looking out for.

"The majority opinion leaves troubling questions about what governmental regulation of political speech the majority finds constitutionally permissible," Johnson wrote. "If VEC had quoted the newspaper articles verbatim rather than voice over the headlines, must it register before speaking? Answer: Ask the PDC. … This is the wrong answer under both the United States and Washington constitutions."