Minnesota House Bill HF990

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/17/25
• Refer: 2/17/25

Caption

Entities or organizations that receive state funding prohibited from making campaign expenditures or otherwise expending money for any political purpose.

Impact

If enacted, HF990 would fundamentally alter the relationship between state funding and political activities for organizations receiving public funds. This includes a broad range of entities, particularly nonprofits, which traditionally rely on state funding for various programs and services. The effective date of the bill is set for July 1, 2025, providing time for organizations currently benefiting from state funding to adjust their practices regarding political expenditures. This regulatory change is positioned to reinforce accountability in the use of state resources while promoting transparency in campaign finance.

Summary

House File 990, authored by Representative Gordon, is a legislative proposal that seeks to prohibit any entity or organization that receives state funding from making campaign expenditures or spending money for political purposes. This bill aims to uphold the integrity of public resources by ensuring that state funding is not used to influence political processes or campaigns, thus creating a clearer boundary between state support and political activities. The proposal is codified within Chapter 211B of Minnesota Statutes.

Contention

The bill may encounter notable contention as various stakeholders debate the implications of restricting political expenditures for entities reliant on state funds. Supporters argue that such measures are essential for preventing potential corruption and ensuring that taxpayer money is not used to sway elections or political outcomes. Conversely, opponents may view this prohibition as an infringement on the free speech rights of organizations that engage in advocacy and political discourse. The capacity of nonprofits to participate in political discussions and influence policy may also come under scrutiny, raising concerns about the balance between regulation and the freedom to advocate for political change.