ECIElection Campaign-Finance Index
How well is money in politics regulated and disclosed?
Dimensions
Contributions
66.7% · 2/3| 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? | 0.5/150.0% | ORC 3517.109 operates on 'allowable aggregate contribution' that does not exceed 'the preprimary contribution limit applicable to that contributor' — clear statutory reference to the contribution-limit framework codified in § 3517.102 (not surfaced directly). “preprimary contribution limit applicable to that contributor” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| CONT.2Independent expenditure rulesAre independent-expenditure rules (third-party spending separate from candidate committees) codified in statute? | 1/1100.0% | ORC 3517.105 codifies independent-expenditure source-identification rules: defines public political advertising, thresholds for required statements ($100/$250/$500 by office), and content of disclaimer. “Whenever a candidate, a campaign committee, a political action committee or political contributing entity with ten or more members, or a legislative campaign fund makes an” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| CONT.3Anonymous-contribution treatmentAre anonymous contributions (cash below the threshold, etc.) addressed in statute with a defined disposition (returned, forfeited, etc.)? | 0.5/150.0% | ORC 3517.10(D)(2) requires a campaign committee filer to include a list of each anonymous contribution with circumstances and reason it cannot be attributed. This addresses anonymous contributions with a reporting requirement, but the surfaced text does not codify a defined disposition (return / forfeiture / donation to charity) as in some other jurisdictions. “list of each anonymous contribution, the circumstances under which it was received, and the reason it cannot be attributed to a specific donor” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
Disclosure
100.0% · 5/5| 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% | ORC 3517.105 codifies in-statute thresholds for independent-expenditure source-identification: $100 local, $250 legislative, $500 statewide. | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| DISC.2Enumerated filing scheduleIs the filing schedule (pre-election, post-election, quarterly, etc.) enumerated in statute with specific deadlines? | 1/1100.0% | ORC 3517.10(A)(1-4) enumerates four specific filing dates in statute: 12th day before election, 38th day after election, last business day of January (annual), last business day of July (annual). “twelfth day before the election to reflect contributions received and expenditures made from the close of business on the last day reflected in the last previously filed” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| DISC.3Disclosure of contributor identityDoes statute require contributor name, address, occupation, and employer be disclosed for contributions above the threshold? | 2/2100.0% | ORC 3517.10 requires full contributor identity: name, current employer (or, if self-employed, occupation and name of business). Full identity tier (employer/occupation) satisfied. “occupation and the name of the individual's business” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| DISC.4Public access to filingsAre campaign-finance filings legally required to be publicly accessible online within a defined time of filing? | 1/1100.0% | ORC 3517.10(D)(5) requires that 'All statements filed under this section shall be open to public inspection in the office where they are filed and shall be carefully preserved for a period of at least six years'. | § view source 2026-05-12 |
Enforcement
62.5% · 3/4| 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% | ORC 3517.99 codifies civil penalty schedule (per-day fines, max amounts), and other subdivisions classify violations as misdemeanors of the first degree (criminal). Combined with § 3517.171 administrative fines and § 3599.04 misdemeanor classification of corrupt-practices contributions, Ohio has both civil and criminal penalties for campaign-finance violations. “shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars for each day of violation” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| 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? | 0.5/150.0% | ORC 3517.15 codifies the jurisdiction of the Ohio Election Integrity Commission to hear referred campaign-finance complaints. Combined with § 3517.14's multi-appointer composition (not surfaced for this datapoint), the commission has some structural independence — but the SoS retains substantial in-cycle control by referring complaints. “Ohio election integrity commission shall hear all matters referred to the commission by the secretary of state” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| ENF.3Private right of actionDoes statute provide a private right of action (citizen or party suit) for campaign-finance violations? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: ORC 3515.10 governs hearing-timing for election contests; not a private right of action for campaign-finance. | § view source 2026-05-12 |
Foreign Source
25.0% · 1/4| 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 section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: ORC 3501.90 codifies a cause of action for election-law harassment; not a foreign-source contribution prohibition. | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| FOR.2Indirect / pass-through foreign rulesAre indirect foreign-source channels (foreign nationals via domestic entities, foreign-controlled LLCs, etc.) addressed in statute? | 1/250.0% | ORC 3517.121 prohibits foreign nationals from contributing 'directly or indirectly through any person or entity' and defines 'foreign national' to include entities organized under foreign law or with principal place of business abroad. This catches some indirect channels (foreign government, foreign political party, foreign-organized entity, conduits) but does not codify corporate-ownership tracing of US-domestic entities owned by foreign interests — so 'some' rather than 'comprehensive'. “directly or indirectly through any person or entity” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| 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 section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: ORC 3517.1011 governs electioneering-communication disclosure; does not require committee verification of contributor foreign-source status. | § view source 2026-05-12 |
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% | ORC 3517.10(D)(5) codifies a six-year preservation rule, but the surfaced text applies it to the filing official (SoS or board of elections) — not to the campaign committee itself. § 3517.10 elsewhere requires committees to 'keep records' for small-amount contributions but does not enumerate a defined retention period for the committee. “shall preserve a copy of the receipt for a period of at least six years” | § view source 2026-05-12 |
| TRACE.2Audit accessAre campaign-committee records subject to mandatory audit (post-election random sample, threshold-triggered audit, or routine cycle) under statute? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute. | no FTS match 2026-05-12 |