Some politically-active corporations are breathing a sigh of relief following last night’s defeat of California’s Proposition 32.  Although the media focused on the ballot initiative’s proposal to bar unions from using payroll deductions to collect PAC contributions, the initiative would have also had three equally far-reaching effects for corporations.  First, it would have prohibited corporations from using payroll deduction to collect PAC contributions if those PACs are active in California.  We previously noted this provision would have likely resulted in many federal PACs staying out of California state races entirely.  Second, Proposition 32 would have banned corporate contributions to candidates and their campaign committees.  For years, California has permitted direct corporate contributions to candidates.  Finally, the initiative would have established a state pay-to-play rule that would have prohibited the PACs of state contractors from contributing to certain state candidates.  Now that these proposed changes have been rejected by the voters, corporations can keep their focus on complying with the complexities of California’s existing campaign finance regime, rather than learning a new one.

Print:
EmailTweetLikeLinkedIn
Photo of Zachary G. Parks Zachary G. Parks

Zachary Park advises a wide range of corporate and political clients on federal and state campaign finance, lobbying disclosure, pay to play, and government ethics laws. Mr. Parks regularly advises corporations and corporate executives on instituting political law compliance programs and conducts compliance…

Zachary Park advises a wide range of corporate and political clients on federal and state campaign finance, lobbying disclosure, pay to play, and government ethics laws. Mr. Parks regularly advises corporations and corporate executives on instituting political law compliance programs and conducts compliance training for senior corporate executives and lobbyists. He also has extensive experience conducting corporate internal investigations concerning campaign finance and lobbying law compliance and has defended clients in investigations by the Federal Election Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee.