Michigan House Bill HB5274

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 10/26/23
• Refer: 10/26/23
• Report Pass: 11/1/23

Caption

Campaign finance: committees; prohibition on certain candidate committee expenditures and disbursements; create exception. Amends sec. 44 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.244). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5272'23, HB 5273'23, HB 5275'23

Impact

The main impact of this bill is on the operation of candidate committees by restricting their ability to make expenditures or disbursements that do not directly contribute to the nomination or election of the candidates they represent. It poses significant changes to the financing landscape by preventing indirect contributions which could potentially be misused. Furthermore, it requires that any individual who obtains funds meant for a committee must transfer those funds in a timely manner or return them, thereby enhancing accountability among committee members and their respective finances.

Summary

House Bill 5274 aims to amend Michigan's Campaign Finance Act, particularly focusing on section 44. The bill establishes specific prohibitions on how candidate committees may handle contributions and expenditures. It specifically prohibits any person from contributing to another with the understanding that those funds will be transferred to a candidate committee. This regulation is intended to tighten the controls on the flow of money within election campaigns and ensure transparency and accountability in the financing of political candidates.

Contention

One notable point of contention surrounding HB 5274 revolves around its link to other pieces of legislation. It is tied to the enactment of House Bills 5272, 5273, and 5275, meaning it will only become law if all related bills also pass. Critics may argue that such tie-bar provisions could complicate legislative processes or lead to unintended consequences if associated bills do not align with the implications of this amendment. Furthermore, while proponents see it as a necessary measure to ensure clean political financing, opponents may view it as an additional regulatory burden on candidate committees, potentially impacting grassroots fundraising efforts.