In a surprising twist, New Hampshire's gubernatorial race has become a battleground for campaign finance laws, with the Republican and Democratic candidates employing vastly different fundraising strategies. The 2023 campaign finance law, which removed limits on donations to candidates from political action committees, has opened the floodgates for unprecedented sums of money to flow into the race, raising questions about transparency and accountability.

Reshaping the Landscape:

Ayotte Shatters Fundraising Records

Kelly Ayotte, the Republican nominee and former U.S. senator, has shattered fundraising records in her quest for the New Hampshire governor's office. As of October 30th, Ayotte has raised a staggering $21 million and spent nearly $19 million of it. This amount far surpasses the funds raised by her Democratic opponent, former Manchester Mayor Joyce Craig, who brought in $7.3 million as of the same deadline. It also dwarfs the $1.7 million raised by incumbent Governor Chris Sununu during his entire 2022 re-election effort.The source of Ayotte's financial dominance is equally remarkable. A majority of her funds, a staggering 70%, come from a single political action committee – the Live Free PAC. This PAC, in turn, has received its entire $21.3 million budget from the Republican Governors Association (RGA). The ability to accept these unlimited donations from the RGA is the direct result of the 2023 campaign finance law, which removed limits on contributions to candidates from political action committees.

Embracing the New Landscape

The Ayotte campaign's application of the new law has been validated by the Attorney General's Office, which has ruled that the Live Free PAC's registration as a "political advocacy organization" rather than a "political committee" allows it to accept and transfer unlimited funds to the candidate. This decision has opened the door for other campaigns to follow suit, and the Democrats have wasted no time in embracing the strategy.The Democratic Governors Association (DGA) has registered its own political advocacy organization, the "DGA New Hampshire PAO," which has accepted a $3.2 million transfer from the DGA and has already transferred $800,000 to the Craig campaign and $3.1 million to the New Hampshire Democratic Party.

The Debate Over Transparency and Accountability

The influx of unlimited donations has sparked a debate over the implications for transparency and accountability in the political process. Campaign finance reform advocates, such as Olivia Zink of Open Democracy, have expressed concerns that the new law has diminished the ability of voters to understand the sources of campaign funding and hold candidates accountable.On the other side of the debate, supporters of the law, like Representative Joe Sweeney, argue that money is a form of speech and that limiting donations is a violation of free speech rights. They contend that the new law simply eases the process for major campaigns to receive large sums of money, which has always been possible through various loopholes.

The Difference Between "Political Committees" and "Political Advocacy Organizations"

The crux of the debate lies in the distinction between "political committees" and "political advocacy organizations" under the new law. While individual donors and corporations are still capped at donating $15,000 to a candidate, and individuals and businesses are limited to $30,000 in donations to a "political committee" or "political party," there are no such limits on donations to a "political advocacy organization."The law defines a political committee as any organization that "promotes the success or defeat of a candidate or candidates or measure or measures," while a political advocacy organization is any organization that spends at least $2,500 for communication that is "functionally equivalent" to advocacy for a candidate or measure, even if that is not the organization's primary role.This ambiguity in the law has allowed the Live Free PAC and the DGA New Hampshire PAO to register as political advocacy organizations, enabling them to accept and transfer unlimited funds to the Ayotte and Craig campaigns, respectively.

The Implications for Future Elections

The strategies employed by the Ayotte and Craig campaigns in the 2023 New Hampshire gubernatorial race could become a blueprint for future elections, both in the state and beyond. The ability to bypass contribution limits through the use of political advocacy organizations has the potential to reshape the landscape of campaign finance, with the potential for even greater sums of money to flow into political races.As the debate over transparency and accountability continues, the impact of the 2023 campaign finance law on the political process will be closely watched. The outcome of the New Hampshire gubernatorial race may serve as a harbinger of things to come, as candidates and political organizations navigate the new financial landscape and seek to gain a competitive edge.