State Rep. Jon Hinck, a candidate for the United States Senate, announced that he has submitted a bill in the Maine Legislature effectively barring corporate contributions to candidates for state office in Maine. The bill, entitled “An Act to Limit to Natural Persons the Right to Contribute to Political Campaigns,” mirrors a law passed in Montana which was subsequently upheld by Montana’s Supreme Court.

“Today marks the two year anniversary of the controversial 5 to 4 Supreme Court Decision in Citizens United case,” said Hinck, who has made pushing back against special interests a centerpiece of his campaign, “in just two short years, Americans are realizing the disastrous ramifications of that decision on our Democracy. We must act here, in Maine, to prevent the corrupting influences of special interest corporations on our elections.”

Maine has a history of supporting efforts to ensure free and fair elections. Notably, voters overwhelmingly approved the Maine Clean Election Act in 1996, making Maine the first State in the nation to establish a program for public financing of elections. Since 2000, candidates for State Senate and House have been able to run elections free from the influence of big money special interests. According to Maine Citizens for Clean Elections, nonpartisan organization that works in the public interest to advocate for and defend the Maine Clean Election Act and related campaign finance law, more than 80 percent of the legislature was elected using Clean Elections.

Hinck, who has been elected three times to the Maine Legislature, has enrolled in the Clean Election program each time and continues to be a strong supporter of the system. Among his priorities in the United States Senate, he said, is campaign finance reform such as a Federal version of clean elections introduced by Maine Congresswoman Chellie Pringree.

“The idea that somehow corporations are people that have the right to spend unlimited amounts of money to buy elections just doesn’t pass the straight face test,” said Pingree. “The American people know this is no way to run a democracy and they know we deserve better than the free-for-all of campaign spending that Citizens United created.”

Pingree has criticized court decisions granting corporations “personhood” status and sponsored legislation to reverse the rulings. Pingree is Chair of the House Democratic Caucus Task Force on Fair Governance and a cosponsor of a constitutional amendment reversing the Citizens United decision. She has also introduced the Fair Elections Now Act, which would create a system of financing of Congressional campaigns that would limit contributions to $100.

Pingree, the former President of Common Cause, said the Supreme Court’s decision two years ago today has had a corrosive effect on elections.

“Not only do corporations now get to spend unlimited amounts of money on elections, they don’t even have to tell the public or their shareholders how much money they are pouring into campaigns,” said Pingree.

Before Hink’s bill can be considered by the Legislature, it must first be approved by the Legislative Council, which is made up of the six Republicans and four Democrats in leadership. They will vote on whether the bill is allowed to proceed through the normal public hearing and work session process to be fully debated and discussed.

“The bill language comes directly from a law upheld by a state’s highest court,” said Hinck. “My bill would support the integrity of fair and clean elections in Maine and help keep the influence of big money at bay. Barring corporations from making political donations helps ensure that the voices of ordinary voters are heard.”

The Montana Supreme Court ruled that its state’s one hundred year old ban on corporate contributions was constitutional and not in conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court’s controversial decision in the Citizens United case. The Montana justices argued that real people and owners of small businesses could be easily overwhelmed and effectively silenced by a handful of large in-state, or out-of-state, corporate interests.

The bill introduced by Hinck would ban all contributions and expenditures made by a corporation in support or opposition to a candidate or political party. It also makes it illegal for a person, candidate or political committee to accept a donation from a corporation and any violations of the law are subject to civil penalty provisions. The law does not prohibit any person who is a shareholder, employee or member of any corporation from making voluntary contributions to political campaigns and candidates.