Montana votes to ban corporate campaign cash
Archived — this story has rotated out of today’s deck. It is kept here in full.
The gist
Montana voters approved Initiative 194 with about 67% support, barring corporate election spending.
The measure faces expected court challenges over the 2010 Citizens United ruling.
Background
Initiative 194 is a Montana ballot measure backed by a campaign organized by Jeff Mangan, a former Montana Commissioner of Political Practices. Supporters billed it as a way to push back against the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, which opened the door to unlimited campaign spending in US politics. Rather than banning corporate donations outright, the measure would limit corporations and other entities it calls "artificial persons" to only powers that are "necessary and convenient," while exempting political action committees, news and editorial content, and individuals. It follows a similar Hawaii law passed earlier this year.
How it unfolded
- 1912Montanans passed the Corrupt Practices Act by initiative with 76% of the vote, angry at the political power of mining giant Amalgamated Copper after the state's Copper Kings had bribed state legislators.
- Aug 1, 2025The proposed constitutional amendment was filed with the Montana Secretary of State's office.
- Nov 3, 2026Montana voters approved Initiative 194; the AP declared passage late Tuesday with a margin of about 115,000 votes at the time of the call.
- Nov 4, 2026With 87% of votes counted Wednesday morning, I-194 had more than 65% support to 35% opposition; the Daily Montanan reported about 67% approved based on 359,527 ballots counted as of 12:20 a.m., with final results not certified.
- Jan 1, 2027The measure takes effect unless a court blocks it.
Key terms
- Citizens United ruling
- A landmark 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that certain campaign finance restrictions on corporate and union election spending violate free speech.
- political action committees
- A U.S. tax-exempt organization that pools campaign contributions and donates them to campaigns for or against candidates, ballot measures, or legislation.
Source: Wikipedia
Who’s saying what
- Support
- The Yes on Initiative 194 campaign says a yes vote means only real people — not corporations, unions, trade associations, nonprofits or groups with anonymous donors — can spend money in Montana elections.
- Expert
- Tom Moore, who devised the legal theory behind the Montana Plan, said Montana took "a historic step toward ending the scourge of corporate and dark money in politics" and that more states following suit could make Citizens United irrelevant.
- Caution
- Critics argue the measure still violates the 2010 Supreme Court ruling, with one saying denying corporations the right to speak about political affairs "is just going to fail."
- Party
- The Montana GOP argues the Montana Plan flies in the face of the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling from 2010.
- Expert
- University of Montana law professor Constance Van Kley says the Supreme Court for decades has ruled that businesses can spend on elections.
Still unverified
Final results are not certified. The Montana Plan is expected to face legal challenges, mostly from conservative and libertarian free speech advocates, and it is unclear whether the organizer's argument would survive a constitutional challenge.