I’m Nancy Morgan, Coordinator of BigMoneyOutVA. We support these bills (HB2165 and HB1686) which probably should be called the George Santos bills. As you know, many of the infractions Santos was charged with are legal in Virginia, but certainly not under federal law nor in most other states. Just to remind you, this is the 11th year this bill has been introduced (2014) We hope that it gets passed because it is a common sense bill which builds citizens' confidence in their legislators and their democratic institutions. Obviously, Virginians are amazed that this bill can’t get out of Chambers. This bill addressed concerns expressed by legislators about frivolous complaints by protecting legislatorss through the establishment of a robust and confidential review process. It is supported by 73 percent of Voters, who in 2021 polling by the Wason Center, support restricting the personal use of campaign funds. It is time to pass this bill which is the law of the land, both federally and in all but two states.

Comments Document

I strongly urge the entire subcommittee to support these bills, authored by two of your committee members. They restrict the use of campaign contributions for personal use. The bills include language to accomodate a transition period. These are supported by all my friends and neighbors, several of whom were very surprised and upset that this was not already law. It's bad enough that "big money" has come to have so much influence in our elections; it's even worse if donations can continue to go to personal expenses. Thanks for your consideration

HB1576 (Cherry) The League of Women Voters supports HB1576.  This bill clarifies procedures for enforcing the prohibition on campaign fundraising during legislative sessions by specifying the State Board of Elections’ responsibility to report alleged violations. We agree that such violations should be reported to the Attorney General, or to the State Supreme Court in the case of an alleged violation by the Attorney General. The League supports actions that limit undue influence from vested interests.  HB1761 (Simon)  The League of Women Voters supports HB1761. The League believes that a public financing option for funding electoral campaigns reduces candidates’ reliance on large private donations and donations from vested special interests. A public funding option for campaign finance gives qualified individuals who don’t have deep pockets, or friends with deep pockets, more incentive to run for elected office, and increases the electorate’s opportunities to evaluate candidates on their merits and not just from paid advertisements. HB1761 is a “may, not must” bill that will give localities that wish to provide a public funding option for certain local elections the opportunity to do so via local ordinance.  HB2140 (Krizek)  The League of Women Voters supports HB2140. Requiring electronic filing of all campaign expenditure reports is a significant step toward promoting transparency and making campaign funding information more easily accessible to the electorate, in the ability both to access the reports and to analyze the information they contain.    HB2165 (Cole)  The League of Women Voters supports legislation restricting personal use of campaign funds. Virginia currently has no legal restrictions on how campaign funds may be used. The League believes that funds raised for a campaign should be used only for expenses directly related to running for office. We support the expanded provisions for what constitutes personal use, and the provision disallowing converting any funds to personal use, not just surpluses at the end of a campaign or term in office    HB2607 (Ware)  The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports legislation that limits campaign contributions. Corporations, particularly public service corporations, and their political action committees should not be allowed to make contributions to any candidate’s campaign committee or political action committee. The issue is the conflict of interest inherent in a corporation’s donating to legislators who have control over their activities, and goes hand in hand with the public perception of corruption and “pay for play.”

Comments Document

I have attached Vote Mama Foundation's written testimony below.

I would very much like to see this bill amended so that the acceptable uses of active campaign funds are restricted to payments for campaign-related expenses. When everyday people donate to a candidate's campaign fund, they expect the money to be used for ads, campaign staff, road signs, bumper stickers, mailings, etc. If they wanted the money to be given away to other candidates or to a political party, they would have donated the money to the other candidates or to the party.

I am in support of HB1686. We should not allow campaigns funds use for personal matters. The campaign fund ONLY to support candidates running for office. The ability to use funds for any other reason is unacceptable. Let's be honest on how we use funds to support those running for office and not use for paying your mortgage, buying a car and/or for personal trips around the world. This is a moral decision. Thank you!

Please support HB 1686. It is absolutely good government for its transparency and insistence on principled and moral leadership that elected leaders not use campaign monies for personal expenses inconsistent with their ordinary and expected jobs as legislators. Any use for personal credit cards, paying mortgages, or other, related expenses should be illegal.

This bill would increase transparency and foster smooth transactions between ELECT and individuals and entities who are authorized by Virginia code to obtain the registered voter list. Please vote YES on HB1952 to promote robust transparency and provide better service to individuals and entities who are authorized to purchase registered voter lists and vote history lists.

I’m Nancy Morgan with BigMoneyOut and we support HB2140 which invests, like other states, in an improved information campaign finance portal on the Board of Elections website. This site could allow citizens to actually access, sort, and download data on campaign filings. This is the norm in most other states Right now it is almost impossible to navigate the current system and data is not presented in a format easily digestible for the public. Investments in an improved public portal was a recommendation provided to the 2021 Sub-Committee on Campaign Finance by the Campaign Legal Center, a national non-partisan authority on campaign finance. Just to be clear, this is not an anti-VPAP bill. VPAP provides meaningful and insightful analysis but there should be a state-funded system, not funded by donors, that allows users to undertake their own specialized searches, sorts, and analyses. In addition, an upgraded system would allow candidates/elected officials to more efficiently input their campaign filings. It would be a win-win for candidates and voters.

Comments Document

This requires the Dept of Elections to invest in a comprehensive on-line campaign finance portal which provides tools for users to access, manipulate and export data. It is to include an easy system for searching and sorting campaign finance information. This is a basic government job! Please support.

Comments Document

This requires the Dept of Elections to invest in a comprehensive on-line campaign finance portal which provides tools for users to access, manipulate and export data. It is to include an easy system for searching and sorting campaign finance information. We should not have to rely on independent organizations like VPAP to provide some of this. This is a government job! Please support.

HB1576 (Cherry) The League of Women Voters supports HB1576.  This bill clarifies procedures for enforcing the prohibition on campaign fundraising during legislative sessions by specifying the State Board of Elections’ responsibility to report alleged violations. We agree that such violations should be reported to the Attorney General, or to the State Supreme Court in the case of an alleged violation by the Attorney General. The League supports actions that limit undue influence from vested interests.  HB1761 (Simon)  The League of Women Voters supports HB1761. The League believes that a public financing option for funding electoral campaigns reduces candidates’ reliance on large private donations and donations from vested special interests. A public funding option for campaign finance gives qualified individuals who don’t have deep pockets, or friends with deep pockets, more incentive to run for elected office, and increases the electorate’s opportunities to evaluate candidates on their merits and not just from paid advertisements. HB1761 is a “may, not must” bill that will give localities that wish to provide a public funding option for certain local elections the opportunity to do so via local ordinance.  HB2140 (Krizek)  The League of Women Voters supports HB2140. Requiring electronic filing of all campaign expenditure reports is a significant step toward promoting transparency and making campaign funding information more easily accessible to the electorate, in the ability both to access the reports and to analyze the information they contain.    HB2165 (Cole)  The League of Women Voters supports legislation restricting personal use of campaign funds. Virginia currently has no legal restrictions on how campaign funds may be used. The League believes that funds raised for a campaign should be used only for expenses directly related to running for office. We support the expanded provisions for what constitutes personal use, and the provision disallowing converting any funds to personal use, not just surpluses at the end of a campaign or term in office    HB2607 (Ware)  The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports legislation that limits campaign contributions. Corporations, particularly public service corporations, and their political action committees should not be allowed to make contributions to any candidate’s campaign committee or political action committee. The issue is the conflict of interest inherent in a corporation’s donating to legislators who have control over their activities, and goes hand in hand with the public perception of corruption and “pay for play.”

As a fifty year citizen of the Commonwealth I appreciate this opportunity to testify in support of HB 2607, HB 2140 and HB 1761. These resolutions will move Virginia toward systems of state and local government more truly representative of all it's citizens and mitigate the legacy of injustice that your fore-bearers in the legislature enshrined in our legal code. I am particularly concerned that, without the remedy provided in HB 2607, our public utilities continue to exert enormous influence over the legislative and regulatory process through the volume and number of campaign contributions they make, with the ultimate aim of maximizing their profits rather than assuring the quality of service they provide. This issue is particularly critical in light of the enormous consequences for electric and water infrastructure related to data center construction. Please give these measures your unanimous support. Sincerely yours, Raymond W. Fary

Please vote to report HB2165. It will provide clarity for candidates and voters on how campaign funds may be used. I am very gratified that "For dependent care expenses that are incurred as a direct result of the person's seeking, holding, or maintaining public office" is included, as this may widen the pool of people who can run for office. Thank you for taking this step to improve Virginia's standing on campaign finance.

Veterans for All Voters strongly supports HB 2165. Candidates for public office should not be permitted to use campaign funds for personal use. A majority of Virginians support this bill. Let's get this done!

Sweet! Time for some campaign finance reform. Please support this bill so that we don’t get any more George Santos’s

I support the bill regarding campaign finance and the prohibition of personal use of campaign funds, here are some reasons you might advocate for it: Preventing Corruption: By clearly defining what constitutes personal use, the bill aims to prevent candidates from using campaign funds for personal enrichment, which could lead to corruption or the perception thereof. This strengthens public trust in political figures. Transparency and Accountability: The legislation promotes greater accountability by ensuring that campaign funds are used strictly for campaign-related activities. It makes it easier for the public, watchdogs, and regulatory bodies to monitor how funds are spent. Level Playing Field: By limiting the personal use of campaign funds, the bill helps ensure that candidates cannot leverage campaign donations for personal gain, which might give wealthier or more established candidates an unfair advantage over others. Clarification of Rules: The introduction of advisory opinions and the requirement for updated summaries from the State Board of Elections provides candidates with clearer guidance on what is permissible, potentially reducing unintentional violations of campaign finance laws. Public Confidence in Elections: When voters know that campaign funds are being used appropriately, it enhances confidence in the electoral process. It assures the public that money is being spent to advance political ideas rather than personal lifestyles. Consistency with Federal Standards: The mention of adopting regulations similar to those from the Federal Election Commission could harmonize state and federal practices, making campaign finance laws more uniform and understandable across different levels of government. Protection of Donors: Donors give money expecting it to support a political campaign, not to fund a candidate's personal life. This bill safeguards donor intentions by ensuring contributions are used for their intended purpose. Addressing Loopholes: By setting clearer boundaries on what is not allowed, the bill aims to close loopholes that might have existed under previous laws, where personal use might have gone unchecked or underreported. Encouraging Ethical Campaigning: The bill encourages candidates to run campaigns based on merit and policy rather than financial manipulation or personal gain, thus promoting a more ethical political environment. Emergency Regulations: The provision for emergency regulations allows for a swift response to any new issues or abuses that might arise, ensuring that the law can be adapted quickly to maintain its effectiveness.

I’m Nancy Morgan, Coordinator of BigMoneyOutVA. We support these bills (HB2165 and HB1686) which probably should be called the George Santos bills. As you know, many of the infractions Santos was charged with are legal in Virginia, but certainly not under federal law nor in most other states. Just to remind you, this is the 11th year this bill has been introduced (2014) We hope that it gets passed because it is a common sense bill which builds citizens' confidence in their legislators and their democratic institutions. Obviously, Virginians are amazed that this bill can’t get out of Chambers. This bill addressed concerns expressed by legislators about frivolous complaints by protecting legislatorss through the establishment of a robust and confidential review process. It is supported by 73 percent of Voters, who in 2021 polling by the Wason Center, support restricting the personal use of campaign funds. It is time to pass this bill which is the law of the land, both federally and in all but two states.

Comments Document

I strongly urge the entire subcommittee to support these bills, authored by two of your committee members. They restrict the use of campaign contributions for personal use. The bills include language to accomodate a transition period. These are supported by all my friends and neighbors, several of whom were very surprised and upset that this was not already law. It's bad enough that "big money" has come to have so much influence in our elections; it's even worse if donations can continue to go to personal expenses. Thanks for your consideration

HB1576 (Cherry) The League of Women Voters supports HB1576.  This bill clarifies procedures for enforcing the prohibition on campaign fundraising during legislative sessions by specifying the State Board of Elections’ responsibility to report alleged violations. We agree that such violations should be reported to the Attorney General, or to the State Supreme Court in the case of an alleged violation by the Attorney General. The League supports actions that limit undue influence from vested interests.  HB1761 (Simon)  The League of Women Voters supports HB1761. The League believes that a public financing option for funding electoral campaigns reduces candidates’ reliance on large private donations and donations from vested special interests. A public funding option for campaign finance gives qualified individuals who don’t have deep pockets, or friends with deep pockets, more incentive to run for elected office, and increases the electorate’s opportunities to evaluate candidates on their merits and not just from paid advertisements. HB1761 is a “may, not must” bill that will give localities that wish to provide a public funding option for certain local elections the opportunity to do so via local ordinance.  HB2140 (Krizek)  The League of Women Voters supports HB2140. Requiring electronic filing of all campaign expenditure reports is a significant step toward promoting transparency and making campaign funding information more easily accessible to the electorate, in the ability both to access the reports and to analyze the information they contain.    HB2165 (Cole)  The League of Women Voters supports legislation restricting personal use of campaign funds. Virginia currently has no legal restrictions on how campaign funds may be used. The League believes that funds raised for a campaign should be used only for expenses directly related to running for office. We support the expanded provisions for what constitutes personal use, and the provision disallowing converting any funds to personal use, not just surpluses at the end of a campaign or term in office    HB2607 (Ware)  The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports legislation that limits campaign contributions. Corporations, particularly public service corporations, and their political action committees should not be allowed to make contributions to any candidate’s campaign committee or political action committee. The issue is the conflict of interest inherent in a corporation’s donating to legislators who have control over their activities, and goes hand in hand with the public perception of corruption and “pay for play.”

It is important for donors to any party to know where their money goes. None of it should be spent on personal items, etc. for a candidate. Sadly, we now have abusers in office who care little for those who donate to their campaigns. This bill provides a step in the right direction.

My name is Nancy Morgan, coordinator of BigMoneyOutVA, a non-partisan, all volunteer group advocating for campaign finance reform. We support these bills (HB2173, HB2484, and HB2670), the objectives of which are to protect legislators & candidates from obscure attack ads which have proliferated since the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United. Many of your colleagues from this body have been subject to these types of attacks, especially before primaries. Just to remind you, after Citizens United was passed in 2010, the justices on the Supreme Court voted 8-1 in favor of full disclosure. Justice Scalia was quoted that “requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed”. If donors want to influence an election and our public policies, fine but they shouldn’t hide behind anonymity. I think that both citizens and candidates are sick of anonymous ads which usually negatively attack candidates anonymously.This bill protects legislators when they are running for office and among voters it builds trust in government. It’s a win-win for voters and legislators.

Please vote “No” on this bill. The bill complicates what currently is and should remain a simple policy: the presiding Governor appoints the Commissioner of Elections, similar to the Governor’s other high-level appointments. To have unelected SBE members select the Commissioner, subject to confirmation by the General Assembly, would render useless important checks and balances of leadership in Virginia and create a serious imbalance of power.

Please vote “No” on this bill. The language of this bill is unreasonably restrictive. The Department of Elections already uses reliable information to match voter registrations with other states, including dates of registration for each state, before determining whether to cancel a voter. Placing the requirement of a “confidence score” of at least 80 percent simply creates confusion and subjectivity to what is otherwise an objective and straightforward process. Without data proving that the existing process results in a significant number of erroneous cancellations, it should be left as is.

If you were in favor of the bill, here are several arguments you might use to support it: Voter Roll Accuracy: The bill aims to ensure that voter rolls are more accurate by requiring better data matching and verification procedures. This could reduce the likelihood of voter fraud by ensuring only eligible voters are on the rolls. Enhanced Data Standards: By setting higher standards for the data used in list maintenance, the bill could lead to more reliable voter lists, reducing errors where ineligible or duplicate registrations might exist. Transparency: The requirement for public access to cancellation records under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act increases transparency in how voter registration is managed, fostering public trust in the electoral system. Proactive Notification: The mandate for notification before cancellation gives voters a chance to correct any misinformation or address issues with their registration, potentially preventing legitimate voters from being removed from the rolls inadvertently. Annual Data Review: The obligation to review data sources annually ensures that the Department of Elections continuously improves its processes, adapting to changes in data quality, technology, or voter demographics. Preventing Cross-Jurisdiction Fraud: By prohibiting the use of data from other states or jurisdictions without unique identifiers, the bill aims to prevent fraudulent activities where individuals might try to vote in multiple places. Confidence in Elections: With more accurate voter lists, there's potentially greater public confidence in election outcomes, as the integrity of the voter registration process is upheld more rigorously. Systematic Approach: The bill provides a systematic approach to voter list maintenance, which could lead to more consistent practices across different registrars, reducing variability in how voter records are managed statewide. Legal Clarity: The clarifications and technical amendments in the bill could help in legal contexts, making it clearer how voter registration and cancellation should be handled, potentially reducing legal disputes over voter eligibility. Long-term Benefits: While there might be short-term costs or adjustments, the long-term benefits could include a cleaner voter database, fewer disputes on election day, and potentially lower costs associated with managing voter challenges or recounts due to registration issues. I am Advocating for this bill for the need of integrity, accuracy, and public trust in the electoral system, these enhancements would make elections more secure and fair. Important for modernizing voter management practices to keep pace with current data handling standards and technologies.

The League of Women Voters supports HB 2276, a bill that will improve Virginia’s voter list maintenance activities and go a long way toward preventing incorrect voter purges. Record matching will be more precise, protecting eligible citizens from disenfranchisement while at the same time preventing those who are not eligible from voting in Virginia. The bill codifies, in detail, security and list maintenance procedures that are already in place throughout the Commonwealth. The bill also strengthens record keeping requirements, so that a voter who has been disenfranchised by mistake can find out what happened. Every locality has a security plan in place, subject to annual reconsideration. The Department of Elections’ IT team can assist any locality that needs help in reaching minimum standards. Change of address procedures are already in place, but the bill spells out the standards. This bill should help to rebuild trust in elections. The League urges the Committee to report.

My name is Nancy Morgan, coordinator of BigMoneyOutVA, a non-partisan, all volunteer group advocating for campaign finance reform. We support these bills (HB2173, HB2484, and HB2670), the objectives of which are to protect legislators & candidates from obscure attack ads which have proliferated since the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United. Many of your colleagues from this body have been subject to these types of attacks, especially before primaries. Just to remind you, after Citizens United was passed in 2010, the justices on the Supreme Court voted 8-1 in favor of full disclosure. Justice Scalia was quoted that “requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed”. If donors want to influence an election and our public policies, fine but they shouldn’t hide behind anonymity. I think that both citizens and candidates are sick of anonymous ads which usually negatively attack candidates anonymously.This bill protects legislators when they are running for office and among voters it builds trust in government. It’s a win-win for voters and legislators.

My name is Nancy Morgan, coordinator of BigMoneyOutVA, a non-partisan, all volunteer group advocating for campaign finance reform. We support these bills (HB2173, HB2484, and HB2670), the objectives of which are to protect legislators & candidates from obscure attack ads which have proliferated since the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United. Many of your colleagues from this body have been subject to these types of attacks, especially before primaries. Just to remind you, after Citizens United was passed in 2010, the justices on the Supreme Court voted 8-1 in favor of full disclosure. Justice Scalia was quoted that “requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed”. If donors want to influence an election and our public policies, fine but they shouldn’t hide behind anonymity. I think that both citizens and candidates are sick of anonymous ads which usually negatively attack candidates anonymously.This bill protects legislators when they are running for office and among voters it builds trust in government. It’s a win-win for voters and legislators.