State Treasurer Ted Wheeler@@http://www.tedwheeler.com/@@ sent a letter to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)@@CE@@ last Thursday in which he called for more transparency on corporate political spending.
In the letter he expressed the need to require publicly traded corporations to report on their political activity, specifically political campaign funding.
“Today, corporations have the absolute right to be involved in political activity and — if their executives choose — to spend heavily on activism or candidates. That particular spending may or may not be a good thing, depending on your personal viewpoint,” Wheeler wrote in the letter addressed to SEC Secretary Elizabeth Murphy@@http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-295.htm@@.
Campaign spending in Oregon is the second-highest per capita in the nation@@http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/03/limiting_campaign_spending_in.html@@ and is one of only four states that have no limit on contributions@@http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16594@@, along with Missouri, Utah and Virginia. Seven states have minimal contribution limits in which they limit or prohibit contributions by corporations and unions but leave contributions from all other sources unlimited.
In the remaining 39 states, all contributions to candidates from individuals, political parties and political action committees are limited. In the case of corporations and unions, they are often prohibited.
Oregon politicians on both sides of the spectrum have proposed to limit campaign spending but cannot agree on the spending limit. Rep. Jefferson Smith@@http://www.leg.state.or.us/smithj/@@ and Rep. Greg Matthews @@http://www.leg.state.or.us/matthews/@@proposed to limit campaign spending in Oregon when they introduced House Bill 2239@@CE@@ and House Joint Resolution 3@@CE@@ in January of this year.
“Our government is obligated to create a system where the voice of the individual can be heard, where the contributions of the small donor will matter, and where the work of the individual volunteer will make a difference, rather than having the process controlled by those who prefer simply to sign a huge check and walk away,” Matthews said.
Despite their efforts and the efforts of other politicians, neither the bill nor the resolution has yet to pass. Each has remained in the House Rules Committee for the last four months.
Still, as politicians in Oregon try to set campaign spending limits within the state, Wheeler has decided to take his efforts to a nationwide level to bring attention to the corporate funding of political activity.
Wheeler hopes his concerns will bring attention to the issue of transparency in political activity by corporations across the country, which is why he contacted the SEC. His office is awaiting a response before they continue in their efforts to make political activity more transparent.
Wheeler’s office stated that the Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund@@http://www.ost.state.or.us/about/Investment/@@ and Oregon’s Common School Fund@@http://www.oregon.gov/DSL/DO/aboutcsf.shtml@@, both of which deal significantly with corporations, have the right to know where the money is being spent.

“Political activity is not free, and it makes absolute sense to give shareholders a clearer view,” Wheeler said. “Shareholders of any company have a right to know about the activities of the company they own, particularly when those actions (or inaction) can impact the bottom line.”
Wheeler used the example that a nationwide boycott of Target stores in 2010 ensued after it was made public that a $150,00 donation from the Target Corporation helped fund MN Forward@@http://www.mnforward.com/@@, a group that backed a gubernatorial candidate with strong views opposing same-sex marriage.
The disclosure of political spending is up from 2005, when merely 10 of the Standard & Poor’s 100 firms voluntarily disclosed information. Although the treasurer is glad that the number of companies disclosing their information is up, he notes there is still a significant percentage of companies that have not disclosed their political activity.
“This is about openness, transparency and about providing accountability for shareholders,” Wheeler said. “At the end of the day, that’s good business and it will be good for Oregonians.”