ECIElection Campaign-Finance Index
How well is money in politics regulated and disclosed?
Dimensions
Contributions
33.3% · 1/3| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| CONT.1Contribution limit framework codifiedIf contribution limits exist, are they set by statute (not administrative discretion)? If no limits, is that absence explicit in statute? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-05-31 |
| CONT.2Independent expenditure rulesAre independent-expenditure rules (third-party spending separate from candidate committees) codified in statute? | 1/1100.0% | Idaho Code § 67-6611 codifies independent-expenditure rules directly in statute, establishing a clear threshold ($100), filing requirement, and disclosure obligations. The section enumerates filing deadlines (pre-election and post-election timeframes, plus expedited 48-hour reporting for large expenditures near Election Day) and specifies required disclosure information (payee identity, amount, date, purpose, candidate/measure identification, and support/opposition designation). “Each person who makes independent expenditures in an aggregate amount exceeding one hundred dollars ($100) in support of or in opposition to any one (1) candidate, political committee, or measure shall file a statement of the expenditure with the secretary of state.” | § view source 2026-06-01 |
| CONT.3Anonymous-contribution treatmentAre anonymous contributions (cash below the threshold, etc.) addressed in statute with a defined disposition (returned, forfeited, etc.)? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-05-31 |
Disclosure
40.0% · 2/5| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| DISC.1Disclosure threshold in statuteIs the disclosure threshold (amount above which contributions must be reported) defined in statute, not regulation? | 1/1100.0% | The section explicitly defines two statutory disclosure thresholds: $500 for candidates for judicial/local office and political committees designated to support/oppose specific candidates or measures, and $1,000 for undesignated political committees. These thresholds are codified directly in statute rather than left to regulation or administrative discretion. “is exempt from filing reports under section 67-6607, Idaho Code, unless and until such time as the candidate receives contributions or expends funds in the amount of five hundred dollars ($500) or more” | § view source 2026-06-01 |
| DISC.2Enumerated filing scheduleIs the filing schedule (pre-election, post-election, quarterly, etc.) enumerated in statute with specific deadlines? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-05-31 |
| DISC.3Disclosure of contributor identityDoes statute require contributor name, address, occupation, and employer be disclosed for contributions above the threshold? | 1/250.0% | Idaho Code § 67-6610(a) statutorily requires disclosure of contributor name and complete address for contributions exceeding $50, satisfying the 'name only' tier (score 1). However, the statute does not require occupation or employer information, falling short of the 'full identity' requirement (score 2) that the criterion seeks. The procedural element of statutory enumeration is present for name and address but absent for the additional identity fields. “Any person who contributes more than fifty dollars ($50.00) (including one or more smaller contributions which aggregate more than fifty dollars ($50.00) in any one calendar year) to a candidate or political committee shall accompany the contribution with a statement of his full name and complete address.” | § view source 2026-06-01 |
| DISC.4Public access to filingsAre campaign-finance filings legally required to be publicly accessible online within a defined time of filing? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-05-31 |
Enforcement
50.0% · 2/4| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| ENF.1Penalty schedule codifiedAre penalties for campaign-finance violations defined in statute with specified amounts (civil) and/or criminal grades? | 2/2100.0% | The statute codifies a dual penalty structure: civil fines with explicit dollar caps ($250 for individuals, $2,500 for non-individuals) and criminal penalties (misdemeanor with up to 6 months imprisonment plus fines). Both civil and criminal penalties are statutorily grounded with enumerated amounts and grades, satisfying the full scope of ENF.1. | § view source 2026-06-01 |
| ENF.2Enforcement body independenceIs the enforcement body (election commission, attorney general, campaign-finance regulator) appointed by multi-branch process and protected from in-cycle political control? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-05-31 |
| ENF.3Private right of actionDoes statute provide a private right of action (citizen or party suit) for campaign-finance violations? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-05-31 |
Foreign Source
0.0% · 0/4| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| FOR.1Foreign-source prohibitionIs direct foreign contribution to a candidate or campaign committee prohibited by statute? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-05-31 |
| FOR.2Indirect / pass-through foreign rulesAre indirect foreign-source channels (foreign nationals via domestic entities, foreign-controlled LLCs, etc.) addressed in statute? | 0/20.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section governs voter privacy and ballot secrecy during voting, not campaign finance or foreign-source contributions. It contains no procedural rules, statutory definitions, or enforcement mechanisms related to indirect foreign-source channels, corporate-ownership tracing, or pass-through contribution structures. The criterion FOR.2 requires codified procedures for addressing foreign nationals' use of domestic entities to fund campaigns; this section addresses an entirely different regulatory domain. | § view source 2026-06-01 |
| FOR.3Foreign-source verificationAre campaign committees required by statute to verify contributors are not foreign-source (vs. relying on contributor self-attestation alone)? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-01 |
Traceability
25.0% · 1/2| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| TRACE.1Records-retention requirementAre campaign committees required by statute to retain records (contributor lists, expenditure documentation, bank statements) for a defined period? | 0.5/150.0% | The statute requires third-party vendors (media, printers, advertising agencies) to keep current records of amounts paid and obligations—a procedural element supporting traceability. However, the criterion asks whether campaign committees themselves must retain records for a defined period. This section does not impose a retention obligation on the campaign committees or treasurers; it imposes one on vendors. Additionally, there is no explicit time period specified ('current record' is vague about duration). The statute mandates record-keeping but not by the entities that would typically be responsible for campaign finance records. “Each newspaper, periodical, broadcasting station, direct mailing company, printer and advertising agency which accepts expenditures from a political treasurer shall keep a current record (available to the public) listing the amounts paid and the obligations incurred by each candidate, political committee or political treasurer” | § view source 2026-06-01 |
| TRACE.2Audit accessAre campaign-committee records subject to mandatory audit (post-election random sample, threshold-triggered audit, or routine cycle) under statute? | — no data | No rationale recorded. | no FTS match |