The CLEAR (Creating Legislative Earnings and Appropriations Responsibility) Act

Thesis Statement:
The convoluted and outdated website used for campaign finance disclosure has led to poor public
access to information and political financing data for Michigan voters. To combat this issue,
Michigan should improve their system by streamlining and simplifying the website used for
disclosing campaign finance data.

Background & Analysis:

With many public officials on trial and ranked 50th in an Integrity Report of state government
transparency (Selweski 2015), the current Michigan campaign finance system is insufficient, due
to a lack of clarity in reporting and accessing campaign finance information. The current
reporting system is implemented by the Secretary of State (SOS) and maintained through
“MERTS Plus”. The information reported can be found through an unnecessarily convoluted
search engine, hindering constituent access to information. Michigan’s reputation of poor public
records and lack of campaign integrity stems from inadequate policy requiring the Secretary of
State to create a user friendly searchable database. The current system does not meet the needs of
voters seeking a thorough view of candidates.

While the Michigan Campaign Finance Act of 1976 aimed to regulate campaign finance by
creating a distinct disclosure system for all state-level candidates (PA 388), the act is antiquated
and does not address public information accessibility. Legislators have a vested interest in
maintaining this status quo. The current system directly impacts individuals with lower
proficiency in digital literacy, including people of color, poorly educated people, and older
people.

In 2018, the Department of Education reported that 28.4% of Americans aged 55-65 are not
digitally literate and 51.1% have a digital literacy score of 1 or below, indicating they are
incapable of complex navigations or tasks with multiple steps. Additionally, people with less
than a high school education level are 36.4% more likely to be digitally illiterate than those with
associate’s degrees or higher. Hispanic and Black communities also show disproportionately
higher rate of low/no digital literacy than white communities (Mamedova & Pawlowski 2018,
22). With the 2020 election approaching,campaign finance records must be readily accessible for
all constituents in order to uphold the integrity of our democracy.

The Policy Idea:

Michigan Department of State receives campaign finance disclosure statements from the
committees of all candidates for state-level, judicial offices, PACs, and all Political Party
Committees. Valuable and crucial financial data are available in Michigan, but the system
employed to disclose such data, the Secretary of State Website, is convoluted and difficult to
interpret for average voters. Therefore, our policy aims to streamline the website and improve its
accessibility by improving the search function and adding a more straightforward aggregate
contribution/expenditure sections, in order to make the website easily navigable and accessible
for all voters.

Policy Analysis:
Integrity Report ranked Michigan last in transparency and accountability, giving failing scores to
public information access, political financing, accountability, and lobbying disclosure (Selweski
2015). Transparency is crucial in any effective and accountable government. Democracies are
more stable when information is transparent and readily available. Citizens are better equipped to
make well-informed decisions and hold their leaders accountable, further legitimizing the
electoral process (Diamond 2015). Therefore, Michigan’s convoluted system for political finance
disclosure is limiting the accountability of government officials and damaging the legitimacy of
the governing body.

Those opposed to reform will note that all information is already available to the public.
However, this information is disorganized and difficult to locate. People of lower digital literacy
are disproportionately affected by this flaw in the campaign finance system. Digitally illiterate
Americans are already in communities with a lack of representation in government, including
Black, Hispanic, or immigrant communities (Mamedova & Pawlowski 2018, 5). Hindering these
Americans’ access to campaign finance data will only further decrease equal representation.

In asserting that all constituents deserve straightforward access to campaign finance data, this
policy will promote accessibility to protect the rights of all people to access this information.
Knowledge is essential for a citizen’s participation in the political process, and equal access for
all solidifies democracy, thus ultimately bolstering the basic human right to representative
democracy (Kirchschlaeger 2014).

The most problematic area of the SOS website is the search engine. The website should be
reorganized to move the unnecessarily complicated classifications in the search function to a
separate filter function under search. The website should include a visual representation, such as
a table or a pie chart, of the total contributions received and total expenditure under committee
and entity search results, in place of the itemized reports that are currently displayed. If tangible
improvements are not made, the legitimacy of elections Michigan will continue to be
undermined, contributing to distrust in government and lower political involvement.

Talking Points:
● A well-designed website demonstrates to donors that their contributions are going to the
endeavors that donors support, thus increasing willingness to donate more consistently
and in higher quantities.
 ● Presenting contribution information in a clear, visible way demonstrates to donors that
nothing is being hidden, thus boosting confidence in governmental transparency and
accountability.
● Contribution information provides donors with better access to their elected officials
(Kalla & Broockman 2016, 545-558). This is crucial in influencing the official’s opinions
on certain issues. Thus, intuitively tracking the contribution history of a candidate will be
valuable in providing the general voters a better sense about the political tendency and
stance of candidates.

Key Facts:
● In Michigan, from 2002 to 2016, the cost of state house races has gone up by $12 million,
and from 2001-2016, Lobbyists have increased the money spent to try to influence
lansing by more than $21 million (Michigan Campaign Finance Network).
● 5% of people say state governments share data very effectively (Horrigan & Rainie 2015)
● 66% of Americans harbor hopes that open data will improve government accountability.
(Horrigan & Rainie 2015)
● 71% of voters want the FEC to take a more active role enforcing campaign finance laws,
and there is at least two-thirds support for this across party lines (Edwards 2019).
● The overall cost of elections from 1998 to 2016 has gone up by more than $5 billion
(Cost of Election). Because of the increasingly growing sums of money being put into
elections, it is so important to be able to keep track of where this money is coming from.

Implementation Plan:
In order for the CLEAR Act to be implemented, a bill will need to be passed to allocate a
specific committee and budget for the website improvement, directly targeting the Secretary of
State and Attorney General who are responsible for enforcement of disclosure. Communication
with Jocelyn Benson, the current Secretary of State, and representatives active in financial
disclosure including David LaGrand, Yousef Rabhi, and Julie Calley will be established- their
endorsements will be essential in passing this bill. In the process of advocating for the CLEAR
Act, it will be crucial to build relationships with a wide array of allies who will enhance and
strengthen the visibility and effectiveness of this policy. The Michigan Campaign Finance
Network, specifically its director Craig Mauger, The National Institute on Money in Politics, and
the Sunlight Foundation are various organizations working toward a similar goal of transparent
campaign finance data who could garner support for this policy. Individuals who could aid in
further research and advocacy include Washtenaw County Commissioner Felicia Brabec,
University of Michigan professors Kristin Fontichiaro and Richard Hall who have an extensive
knowledge and expertise on digital literacy and election law and finance, respectively.

Action Plan Snapshot:

Our first step for transitioning from policy writing to the advocacy stage would be to reach out to
key allies identified in our implementation plan to gain potential supports and possibly more
insights into the issue so we can further modify and improve our policy idea. Our group has
already reached out to Craig Mauger and Richard Hall and will be reaching out to other key
allies and targets in the near future once we have done a sufficient amount of research on them.
In addition, our group has also initiated the coalition-building process here on the campus of the
University of Michigan, we are planning on reaching out to other progressive student
organizations such as Turn Up Turnout (TUT), an organization aiming to improve voter turnouts;
and Student Community of Progressive Empowerment (SCOPE), whose goal is to empower
undocumented and new immigrant communities.

We also started the process of planning a lobby day preferably in January or early February to
the Michigan State Capital in Lansing to meet with officials and legislators, we have two
members with previous experiences with lobby day and they will be flag shipping the outreach
process. We will also have a meeting strategy workshop for new members of the team to have a
basic understanding of meeting with officials.

Through communication with legislators and organizations, we will work to implement and
further develop our idea for campaign finance reform into policy. We will also be gathering ideas
and opinions from students and average voters potentially through a google form survey, which
can also be used to provide our policy with statistical support.

Timeline:
December 20th: contact targeted legislators to meet
January 5th: finalize meeting schedule with target legislators
January 25th: meeting strategy workshop with all group members
February 5th: finalize lobby day schedule and strategy

One tool we can use for advocacy is studies about how lack of transparency will instate distrust
among average voters and thus discourage political involvement, which means lower voter
turnouts and weaker support from constituents, thus emphasizing the necessity of our idea.
Another tool that we can use is to utilize members of our group who are from Michigan and let
them to speak to their representatives or senators directly as their constituent in order for better
receptiveness and feedback.
 References:
“Cost of Election.” OpenSecrets.org, https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/cost.php.

Diamond, Peter. “What Are the Consequences of Governmental Transparency?” Today's

Question, MPR, 1 Dec. 2015, https://blogs.mprnews.org/todays-question/2015/12/what-
are-the-consequences-of-governmental-transparency/.

Edwards, Sheely. “Bipartisan Poll Finds Voters Want Stronger Enforcement of Campaign
Finance Laws, Increased Transparency in Elections.” Campaign Legal Center, 18 Nov.
2019, https://campaignlegal.org/update/bipartisan-poll-finds-voters-want-stronger-
enforcement-campaign-finance-laws-increased.

Horrigan, John B., and Lee Rainie. “Americans' Views on Open Government Data.” Pew
Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech, Pew Research Center, 21 Apr. 2015,
https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/04/21/open-government-data/.

Kalla, Joshua and David E. Broockman, "Campaign Contributions Facilitated Access to

Congressional Officials: A Randomized Field Experiment, "American Journal of Political
Science, 60:3, July 2016, pp. 545–558

Kerchschlaeger, Peter. “The Relation between Democracy and Human Rights.” Social Studies,
Globalistics and Globalization Studies Aspects & Dimensions of Global Views, 2014,
https://www.sociostudies.org/almanac/articles/the_relation_between_democracy_and_hu
man_rights/.

Mamedova, Saida, and Emily Pawlowski . “A Description of U.S.Adults Who Are Not Digitally
Literate.” Statistics in Brief, 29 May 2018, pp. 3–22., doi:2018161.

Michigan Campaign Finance Act of 1976 PA 388 of 1976. Dec. 30, 1976. Michigan Legislative
Website Data. Web. 15 Nov. 2019.

Selweski, Chad. “Michigan Gets F Grade in 2015 State Integrity Investigation.” Center for
Public Integrity, 9 Nov. 2015, https://publicintegrity.org/federal-politics/state-
politics/state-integrity-investigation/michigan-gets-f-grade-in-2015-state-integrity-
investigation/.