ECIElection Campaign-Finance Index

The section explicitly codifies contribution limits in statute with specific dollar amounts ($1,000 for individuals, $25,000 for PACs, $10,000 for party committees with restrictions). The limits are numerically defined with clear applicability rules, leaving no room for administrative discretion in setting the ceilings. This satisfies the procedural requirement that contribution limits be set by statute rather than administrative determination.

“No person, other than the candidate to his or her own campaign, nor any political action committee shall make a contribution or contributions to any candidate, as defined by § 17-25-3 , or political action committee or political party committee that, in the aggregate, exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) within a calendar year; nor shall any political action committee make such contributions that in the aggregate, exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) within a calendar year; nor shall any candidate or any political action committee or any political party committee accept a contribution or contributions that, in the aggregate, exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) within a calendar year from any one person or political action committee.”

The section codifies independent-expenditure rules directly in statute, including definition of what constitutes independent expenditures (spending not coordinated with candidates/committees), reporting thresholds ($1,000), filing deadlines (7 days, or 24 hours within 30 days of election), and required disclosure elements (identity of spender, recipients, amounts, candidate/referendum identification, affirmation of non-coordination, and donor disclosure). The framework is exhaustively enumerated with specific procedural and reporting requirements.

The statute explicitly defines the disposition of anonymous contributions in two scenarios: if donor identity can be ascertained, the contribution must be returned; if not, it must escheat to the state. This provides clear statutory procedure with an exhaustive enumeration of treatment options and is codified directly in the statute without reliance on regulatory discretion.

The statute explicitly defines the disclosure threshold for contributions at $100 per calendar year, codified directly in § 17-25-11. This is a clear, enumerated statutory threshold, not delegated to regulation or administrative discretion. The threshold applies consistently across candidates, political party committees, and political action committees.

“The name and address and place of employment of each person from whom contributions in excess of a total of one hundred dollars ($100) within a calendar year were received”

The statute enumerates a clear filing schedule with specific, quantified deadlines: 7 days for ordinary expenditures, 24 hours for expenditures made within 30 days before the election, and threshold-triggered reporting when aggregate expenditures reach $1,000. These deadlines are statutory, concrete, and unambiguous, satisfying the procedural-clarity requirement for enumerated filing schedules.

“Any person, business entity or political action committee making independent expenditures, electioneering communications, or covered transfers shall report all such campaign finance expenditures and expenses to the board of elections, provided the total of the money so expended exceeds one thousand dollars ($1,000) within a calendar year, to the board of elections within seven (7) days of making the expenditure. A person, business entity or political action committee who makes or contracts to make independent expenditures, electioneering communications, or covered transfers with an aggregate value of one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more shall electronically file a campaign finance report to the board of elections describing the expenditures. After a person, business entity or political action committee files a report under subsection (b), the person, business entity or political action committee shall file an additional report after each time the person, business entity or political action committee makes or contracts to make independent expenditures, electioneering communications, or covered transfers aggregating an additional one thousand dollars ($1,000) with respect to the same election as that to which the initial report relates. When a report is required by subsection (c) or (d) of this section within thirty (30) days prior to the election to which the expenditure was directed, it shall be filed within twenty-four (24) hours of the expenditure. When such a report is required at any other time, it shall be filed within seven (7) days after the expenditure.”

The statute explicitly requires disclosure of name, street address, city, state, zip code, occupation, and employer (or business name if self-employed) for persons making independent expenditures, electioneering communications, or covered transfers. Additionally, it mandates disclosure of the identity of all donors contributing $1,000 or more to the spender within the election cycle, satisfying the full-identity disclosure requirement (name, address, occupation, employer).

“Reports of independent expenditures, electioneering communications, or covered transfers by a person shall contain the name, street address, city, state, zip code, occupation, employer (if self-employed, the name and place of business), of the person responsible for the expenditure, the name, street address, city, state, and zip code of the person receiving the expenditure the date and amount of each expenditure, and the year to date total.”

The statute explicitly requires the board of elections to make all campaign finance reports available electronically on its website within a defined time period (one to two business days after receipt). This is a clear statutory mandate with specific timelines and a specified medium (electronic, searchable format on the board's website), satisfying the procedural requirement for public access to filings online within a defined timeframe.

The section codifies both criminal penalties (misdemeanor conviction with up to $1,000 fine per violation) and civil administrative penalties (state board authority to impose up to $100 fine per violation), providing a dual-track penalty schedule with specified amounts directly in statute. This satisfies the criterion at the highest level.

“Any person who willfully and knowingly violates the provisions of this chapter shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) per violation. The state board may fine any person or entity who violates the provisions of this chapter in an amount not more than one hundred dollars ($100) per violation.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 17-25.3-1 creates reporting requirements and delegates enforcement to 'the board of elections' but does not address the appointment process, structural independence, or protection from political control of that enforcement body. The statute imposes procedural obligations (filing deadlines, disclosure fields) but provides no information about whether the board is appointed by a multi-branch process or insulated from in-cycle political interference. Procedural clarity regarding enforcement-body independence requires statutory specification of appointment and removal protections, which are absent here.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section establishes enforcement mechanisms exclusively through the Board of Elections and the attorney general; it permits the board to file civil actions and provides for judicial review of board actions by 'any interested person,' but does not create a private right of action allowing citizens or political parties to independently sue for campaign-finance violations. The phrase 'any interested person' refers to review of board decisions, not to independent enforcement authority.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 17-25-3 is a definitional section that establishes terminology for Rhode Island's campaign-finance chapter. It does not contain or reference any prohibition on foreign-source contributions to candidates or campaign committees. The section defines key terms (candidate, contributions, political action committee, etc.) but contains no statutory language addressing foreign sources, foreign nationals, or foreign entities. A substantive foreign-contribution prohibition would be found in a different section (likely within Rhode Island's substantive campaign-finance restrictions), not in this definitional provision.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses voter bribery and intimidation — a criminal offense — but contains no statutory procedure governing foreign-source contributions, indirect channels, corporate-ownership verification, or any campaign-finance disclosure mechanism. FOR.2 requires statutory rules on indirect foreign-source funding (pass-throughs, foreign-controlled entities); this section is silent on campaign finance sourcing entirely.

No matching sections in corpus.

The statute explicitly requires campaign treasurers and committee treasurers to maintain and preserve all records and supporting documentation for a clearly defined four-year period from filing date. This satisfies the core procedural requirement of a statutory record-retention mandate with specified duration, applicable to candidates, party committees, and PACs.

“the campaign treasurer of each candidate seeking nomination for election or election to public office shall maintain and preserve all records and supporting documentation for a period of four (4) years from the filing date. For every report filed after the effective date of this chapter, the treasurer of each political party committee and political action committee shall be required to maintain and preserve all records in support of the committee reports filed pursuant to § 17-25-11 for a period of four (4) years from the filing date.”

The statute grants the board discretionary authority to conduct post-audits ('may conduct') rather than mandating routine or systematic audits. While the power to audit is codified, the absence of mandatory triggers (random sampling, threshold-based selection, or routine-cycle requirements) means audit access depends on board discretion rather than procedure. The section addresses audit authority but not audit obligation or methodology.

“The board may conduct a post-audit of all accounts and transactions for any election cycle”