Letter from the Editor: We’re focused on campaign finance transparency

Oregon’s primary election season is in full swing, and that means a busy time for The Oregonian/OregonLive’s reporters.

One area we’ve emphasized in our coverage is campaign finance. Oregon has an unusual system for regulating political spending and contributions: There are virtually no limits, but most contributions and expenditures must be reported to the public.

The implications of that system were well chronicled in reporter Rob Davis’ series “Polluted by Money,” which showed in stark terms how the lack of campaign finance limits led to more lax environmental regulations in Oregon, compared to neighboring states.

Since the series was published in 2019 and Oregonians overwhelmingly voted to legalize campaign finance limits in 2020, advocates for reform have failed to make much progress despite earnest efforts. Various attempts to establish limits have failed in the past few years, hitting dead ends in the Democrat-controlled Legislature and speed bumps on the way to the ballot.

At the end, Oregon is one of just five states with no limits whatsoever on campaign contributions. (The city of Portland and Multnomah County do have strict limits, which reporters Shane Dixon Kavanaugh and Nicole Hayden have written about in depth.)

The state’s lack of limits means every political year sees millions of dollars pouring into campaigns at all levels of government. In 2018, Oregon set a new record for campaign spending in the governor’s race – more than $37 million. And lead politics reporter Hillary Borrud’s analysis published last week indicated that record is likely to be broken in 2022.

One bright spot, however, is transparency. At least Oregonians can see the unbridled spending by corporations, special interests and individuals.

That is, if you can figure out how to navigate Oregon’s online system for tracking contributions and spending by campaigns.

Oregon law requires campaigns to regularly report contributions and spending to the secretary of state elections division. The information is then published in a database known as Orestar.

No system is perfect. Powerbrokers still can operate anonymously through “dark money” organizations that disclose donations but not the original sources of the funds.

But the online disclosures provide some measure of accountability for candidates and campaigns. Politicians will insist that large political donations do not affect their positions (they are receiving the contributions because they already generally align with the donor’s views, they typically argue).

We can’t see into someone’s heart or mind, but we can watch how they decide on crucial matters, hold them accountable for their legislative votes, and know who has supported them financially, thanks to Oregon’s campaign finance disclosure laws.

We can also see when they spend campaign money on themselves. As Davis reported, candidates can spend the money on dry cleaning, new laptops, dining or other “questionable spending that enhanced their lifestyles.”

State law requires filing information about campaign contributions no later than 30 days from a transaction in most circumstances. But reports can be submitted late with little consequence, as Borrud pointed out earlier this year.

Unfortunately, the state does not make campaign finance violations available online, which limits the public’s ability to know who is in or out of compliance. Oregonians can find out about them, as Borrud did, by submitting a public records request.

This spring, The Oregonian/OregonLive is taking steps to demystify the money around campaigns. We’re posting weekly analyses at least through the May 17 primary on fundraising or spending. (Find all of our posts at oregonlive.com/data.)

Our reporters and data analysts, led by politics editor Betsy Hammond and investigations editor Brad Schmidt, are overseeing the project. Data specialist Mark Friesen is breaking down the data and making it into easily understood lists, maps, look-up tables and other reader-friendly tools.

Our first article, March 20, detailed the biggest donors to Oregon races so far in 2022. Our second analyzed stark geographic fundraising patterns in the Multnomah County chair race; our third compared the fundraising trajectory over time by gubernatorial candidates, with independent Betsy Johnson way out ahead; and our latest will look at neighborhood representation in Portland’s unique donor-match system.

Covering politics is a core area for our newsroom. Ensuring an informed citizenry is one of the main reasons a free press is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

“Candidates and measures ultimately win by drawing the most votes from among Oregon’s more than 2 million registered voters,” Hammond said. “But money plays a big role in driving voter decision-making, and that money is often concentrated in the hands of a relatively small number of very wealthy individuals and powerful groups. We consider it essential to watchdog political contributions and spending patterns and give voters maximum information to understand how actors in and outside of Oregon with access to mega dollars are influencing key races in our state.”

We view transparency around elections as some of the most important reporting we do. Voters deserve information about who is spending money to sway their opinion and gain their support. Thanks to our many subscribers who make this vital work possible.