A long-standing effort to require campaigns for the U.S. Senate to file their campaign finance reports electronically has hit a new roadblock. An amendment offered by Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) would infringe on contributor privacy rights by requiring donor disclosure by groups that file Senate ethics complaints. An ideologically diverse group of nonprofits sent a letter to Senate leadership voicing opposition to this proposal, saying the amendment's clear intent is "to discourage organizations from taking action to keep government accountable."

Since 2001, candidates for the House and the presidency, as well as federal political action committees, have been required to file campaign finance reports online with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Voters can immediately view this information and see who supported each candidate. The Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act (S. 223), introduced by Sens. Russell Feingold (D-WI) and Thad Cochran (R-MS), would require that Senate candidates do the same. Currently, the Senate's paper campaign finance reports have to be entered into a computer before the information can go online. This time-consuming process delays public release of the information for months after the contributions are made and weeks after they filed. In the case of reports due at the end of October, the information is not available until after the election. S. 223 would change this by requiring Senate campaign reports to be filed electronically, creating a more cost-effective, transparent, and timely process.

The bill passed out of the Senate Rules Committee on March 28, and since then, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the Rules Committee chair, has fought to pass the bill unanimously. The issue has been raised in the last two sessions of Congress but has never been passed by the Senate because holds have been put on the bill in order to block it.

Ensign's hold is designed to force consideration of his amendment, which would require any charity, religious organization or civic group filing a complaint with the Senate Ethics Committee to disclose the identity of donors giving more than $5,000. This would, in effect, discourage groups from filing ethics complaints against senators, which is why supporters of the bill call the non-germane amendment a "poison pill."

In response to the Ensign amendment, OMB Watch coordinated an effort by a broad group of nonprofits and coalitions to write to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) urging them to drop the Ensign amendment. The letter states, "This proposal contravenes and runs counter to the letter and spirit of well-established tax law policies, rules and regulations protecting the identity of donors that were enacted in recognition of the Supreme Court's decision in NAACP v. Alabama. If adopted, this provision would have the effect of changing existing tax law without the benefit of a full and open public debate, including involvement of Congressional tax-writing committees, and without a change in the Supreme Court's decision."

A few days after the letter was sent, Feinstein asked Ensign to withdraw his amendment, and in seeking a compromise, proposed to hold a Rules Committee hearing on the subject of the amendment. Referencing the groups' letter, Feinstein's press release stated, "[A] large group of conservative and liberal non-profit organizations wrote to express their belief that the amendment is obstructionist and retaliatory, and runs counter to donors' privacy, free speech, and association rights. In addition, they charge that the amendment would have an effect on existing tax laws."

Why such a straightforward, good government bill that has bipartisan support (forty co-sponsors, including sixteen Republicans) cannot easily pass is perplexing. Most states, in fact, require easy access to campaign finance reports. A new report by the Campaign Disclosure Project found that 30 states require statewide candidates to file disclosure reports electronically. Ensign should drop his amendment to allow for the quick passage of a bill that has no public opposition and simply requires the electronic filing of campaign reports.