Bill shielding donors clears NC House

Concerns linger that there's more to this bill than promised.

Posted 6:46 p.m. Aug 19, 2021 — Updated 2:00 p.m. Aug 20, 2021

Travis Fain

, WRAL statehouse reporter

RALEIGH, N.C. — Legislation requiring charities and other nonprofits to keep donors secret unless the donor gives written permission cleared the North Carolina House on Thursday, despite continued concerns that the measure will add another layer of secrecy to political advertising.

Supporters of Senate Bill 636 say that's not the intent, and that's not what the bill does. The measure specifically says it won't apply to disclosures required by North Carolina's campaign finance laws, and a Politifact check earlier this year on the bill deemed claims from Democratic opponents "mostly false."

Investigators could still get donor records with a subpoena under the bill.

But the Russian nesting-doll nature of some modern campaign finance operations leaves critics, who don't see much other reason for the bill, uneasy.

“This bill protects wealthy special interest and dark money groups," North Carolina Voters for Clean Elections Coalition Director Melissa Price Kromm said Thursday in a vain effort to stop the measure in committee.

The bill passed the full House soon after that meeting, on a 58-34 party-line vote, with quite a few members absent. It heads back to the Senate, which passed a slightly different version of the bill in May on its own party-line vote.

Fact check: Would North Carolina bill 'allow' 501(c)(4) nonprofits to hide their donors?

The Senate can insist on its version or go along with the House's language, which would send the measure to Gov. Roy Cooper to sign, veto or allow to become law without his signature.

Supporters say they're protecting donors from cancel culture, and they point to a recent U.S. Supreme Court case out of California, which had tried to require nonprofits that can typically shield their donors to release lists to the state.

The high court rejected California's law, and no such effort to mine donor lists is known in North Carolina. Sponsoring Sen. Norm Sanderson, R-Pamlico, said changing state law here would be "like having suspenders and a belt," backing up the Supreme Court decision.

"We are not trying to hide," Sanderson said Thursday.

"It does not change any law that is currently in North Carolina," he said, presumably referring only to state campaign finance laws.

A group called People United for Privacy has pushed the issue in North Carolina, as has the John Locke Foundation, a conservative think tank. The groups pitched the bill as an anti-harassment measure for donors who give, for example, to an abortion-rights group, or to a pro-Second Amendment group.

What if their neighbors find out and berate them for their beliefs, People United for Privacy lobbyist Susan Vick asked legislators.

"We are in now a bunker mentality," Vick said. "We must protect the last bastion, the backbone of this country, which is charitable giving."

Democrats said they're more worried about so-called "dark money" groups, nonprofits often chartered under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Service code. Known as "social welfare" groups, these entities already are allowed to keep their donors secret and to run ads on issues, but those ads are often thinly veiled attempts to swing elections for or against particular candidates.

Rep. Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, tried to amend the bill on the House floor so it would apply only to 501(c)(3) nonprofits, which would cover most traditional charities and leave dark money groups unaffected. Republicans voted it down.

"The real threat is to our freedom of association, our freedom of speech.," Rep. Hugh Blackwell, R-Burke, said from the floor. "This amendment would leave the door open to attacks on donor lists … from multiple charitable organizations.”

Correction: This post has been edited in the second-to-last paragraph. The amendment was sponsored by Rep. Pricey Harrison, not Rep. Marcia Morey, as initially reported.

Suggest A Correction