Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Arguments about donor disclosure and political polarization
| Donor privacy and disclosure policy |
| • Disclosure of nonprofit donor information to governments • Disclosure of nonprofit donor information to the public • Disclosure and political polarization |
This article is one of 10 that described arguments about donor privacy and disclosure policy between 2019 and 2023. This article may not reflect subsequent developments in arguments about donor privacy and disclosure policy. For more on Ballotpedia's past donor privacy and disclosure policy coverage, click here.
Whether or not the disclosure of nonprofit donor information causes political polarization is a topic of debate within policy circles. Those arguing that limiting donor disclosure causes political polarization say it allows donors to have an outsized influence on American politics, erodes the public’s trust in government and democratic institutions, makes political communications more opaque, and creates incentives for controversial ideas to spread in the public square.
Those who argue limiting donor disclosure is not a cause of political polarization say it ensures the public can hear controversial ideas and causes, confidentiality is not a major concern of voters or the source of political conflict, fully transparent political campaign donations still generate political and social polarization, and free speech and free association are central to the donor confidentiality debate across the political spectrum.[1][2]
The following pages identify the main areas of debate related to donor disclosure in the context of political polarization:
- Arguments that limiting donor disclosure causes political polarization
- Arguments that limiting donor disclosure does not cause political polarization
Overview of arguments taxonomy
Ballotpedia broke down the debate over donor disclosure and privacy according to the following three subject areas that each had supporting and opposing arguments:
Arguments about disclosure of nonprofit donor information to governments
-
- Disclosure ensures accountability and prevents fraud and corruption
- Disclosure limits the influence of major donors using nonprofits to advance private interests
- Exposure of donor information is rare, and the risk to donors and nonprofits is low
- Disclosure prevents foreign influence in politics and elections
- Disclosure and donor visibility benefits nonprofits as an endorsement of their mission
- Nonprofit donor disclosures do not deter donors from contributing
- Providing information on donors does not burden nonprofits and builds trust
- Nonprofit donor disclosure violates free speech rights
- Disclosure violates rights to free association and privacy
- Disclosure can lead to donor harassment, backlash, retaliation
- Disclosure of confidential donor information by governments does occur
- Government has other means to combat fraud and nonprofit fraud and corruption
- Disclosure is a solution in search of a problem and consumes resources with no clear benefit or purpose
- The California state government’s donor disclosure requirements were exceedingly broad and disproportional
Arguments about disclosure of nonprofit donor information to the public
-
- Donor disclosure requirements do not constrain constitutional rights to free speech and free association
- Disclosure increases accountability and prevents fraud and corruption
- Disclosure limits the influence of major donors using nonprofits to advance private interests
- Disclosure and donor visibility benefits nonprofits as an endorsement of their mission
- Donor disclosure does not inhibit charitable giving
- Disclosure is part of donors’ responsibility to stand behind their positions
- Donor disclosure provides the public with information about who is attempting to influence public debate
- Nonprofit donor disclosure to the public violates free speech rights
- Disclosure violates rights to free association and privacy
- Disclosure subjects donors to potential harassment, retaliation, and danger
- Disclosure inhibits charitable giving, harming the viability of nonprofits
- Disclosure harms the public by creating selective enforcement and suppression of controversial or politically unpopular ideas and groups
Arguments about donor disclosure and political polarization
-
- Undisclosed spending by nonprofits has allowed donors to have an outsized influence on American politics
- The influence of undisclosed spending has eroded the public’s trust in government and democratic institutions
- Not requiring donor disclosure has made political communications more opaque
- Limiting donor disclosure creates incentives for controversial ideas to spread in the public square
- Limiting disclosure ensures that controversial or politically unpopular ideas and causes can be heard in the public square
- Nonprofit donor confidentiality is not a major concern of voters or the source of political conflict
- Political campaign donations are fully transparent yet still lead to corruption and fraud and generate political and social polarization
- Rights of free speech and free association are central to the donor confidentiality debate across the political spectrum
See also
- Donor disclosure and privacy policy in the United States, 2019-present
- Arguments about disclosure of nonprofit donor information to governments
- Arguments about disclosure of nonprofit donor information to the public
External links
Footnotes
| |||||||
