ECIElection Campaign-Finance Index

The section explicitly codifies contribution limits in statute by prohibiting contributions 'in excess of the amounts permitted by §3-8-5c' and by reference establishes the framework as statutory rather than discretionary. The limit framework is grounded in the legislative code itself, satisfying the criterion that contribution limits (if they exist) must be set by statute, not administrative discretion.

“A person may not, directly or indirectly, make any contribution in excess of the amounts permitted by §3-8-5c of this code, in connection with any campaign for nomination or election to or on behalf of any statewide office, in connection with any other campaign for nomination or election to or on behalf of any other elective office in the state or any of its subdivisions, or in connection with or on behalf of any person engaged in furthering, advancing, supporting, or aiding the nomination or election of any candidate for any of the offices.”

West Virginia Code § 3-8-2 codifies comprehensive independent-expenditure rules in statute, establishing a threshold ($1,000), mandatory disclosure requirements with enumerated content fields (person identity, direction/control, book custodian, principal place of business, expenditure amounts, candidate names, support/opposition intent, contributor names and details, and non-coordination certification), and specific filing deadlines (within 24 hours for late-stage expenditures above $5,000/$500 thresholds; within 48 hours for pre-election expenditures of $10,000+). The statute defines the universe of required disclosures and does not delegate substantive rule-making to administrative discretion.

“any person who makes independent expenditures in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $1,000 during a calendar year shall file a disclosure statement, according to the requirements of §3-8-5 of this code, that contains all of the following information”

Section 3-8-5a(j) explicitly addresses anonymous contributions with a clear statutory disposition: they must be donated to the state General Revenue Fund, recorded on the financial statement, and may not be used for election expenses. This provides exhaustive procedural guidance on how to handle anonymous funds, satisfying the criterion's requirement for a defined disposition in statute.

“When any person receives an anonymous contribution which cannot be returned because the donor cannot be identified, that contribution shall be donated to the General Revenue Fund of the state. Any anonymous contribution shall be recorded as such on the candidate's financial statement but may not be expended for election expenses.”

The statute explicitly defines a disclosure threshold of $25: contributions at or above that amount require disclosure of telephone number, occupation, and employer name, while contributions below $25 require less detailed disclosure. This threshold is directly codified in statute (§ 3-12-9(b)(2)), not delegated to regulation or administrative discretion.

“For qualifying contributions of $25 or more, the contributor's signature, printed name, street address, zip code, telephone number, occupation and name of employer; and for qualifying contributions of less than $25, the contributor's signature, printed name, street address and zip code”

No matching sections in corpus.

The statute explicitly requires full identity disclosure for contributions exceeding $250 in a single election cycle: name, residence, mailing address, major business affiliation, and occupation (for individuals). This satisfies the statutory enumeration of all four disclosure elements (name, address, occupation, employer/affiliation) above the specified threshold.

“The name of any person making a contribution and the amount of the contribution. If the total contributions of any one person in any one election cycle amount to more than $250, the residence and mailing address of the contributor and, if the contributor is an individual, his or her major business affiliation and occupation shall also be reported.”

The statute mandates public access to campaign-finance reports and directs use of electronic means 'whenever possible,' establishing a procedural duty. However, it lacks specificity on the critical elements: no defined timeline for online publication after filing is stated, no penalty schedule for non-compliance with the access requirement, and no enforcement mechanism is specified. The 'whenever possible' language introduces discretion that weakens the clarity of the obligation.

“Ensure public access to the campaign finance reports required pursuant to this article, and whenever possible, use electronic means for the reporting, storing and display of the information”

The statute codifies criminal penalties with specified amounts for two distinct campaign-finance violations: accepting excess contributions or misusing funds (§3-12-15(a), $50–$500 fine and/or up to 30 days jail) and providing false or withheld information (§3-12-15(b), $1,000–$10,000 fine and/or up to one year jail). Both violations are graded as misdemeanors with enumerated penalty ranges, satisfying the criminal prong fully. No civil penalties are mentioned, but the presence of clearly codified criminal penalties with specified amounts meets the statutory grounding and enumeration requirements for ENF.1.

“(a) A participating or certified candidate who, either personally or through his or her committee, knowingly accepts contributions or benefits in excess of those allowed under this article, spends or obligates funds in excess of the public campaign financing funding to which he or she is entitled or uses the benefits or funding for a purpose other than those permitted under this article is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than $50 nor more than $500, or confined in jail for up to thirty days or both. (b) A participating or certified candidate who, either personally or through his or her committee or financial agent, provides false information to, or conceals or withholds information from, the State Election Commission or the Secretary of State is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or confined in jail for up to one year or both.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: While this section provides for gubernatorial appointment with Senate advice and consent (a multi-branch process), it contains no protection against in-cycle political control. The Governor appoints during the same electoral cycle, and there are no term-length protections, removal restrictions, or other safeguards that would insulate commissioners from immediate partisan pressure during an election campaign. The criterion requires both multi-branch appointment AND protection from in-cycle political control; this section satisfies only the first element.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 3-7-6 addresses election-contest procedures and judicial jurisdiction over disputed elections, not campaign-finance violations or enforcement mechanisms. It contains no private right of action, penalty schedule, or enforcement procedure related to campaign finance.

The statute explicitly prohibits foreign nationals from making direct or indirect contributions to candidate committees and political committees. The prohibition is codified in statute, covers express and implied promises, and applies to both direct and indirect contributions. This satisfies the statutory-grounding requirement for FOR.1.

The statute explicitly prohibits foreign nationals from making contributions 'directly or indirectly,' which addresses the concept of indirect channels. However, the section lacks statutory detail on verification mechanisms, corporate-ownership tracing, or procedures to identify and block pass-through contributions via domestic entities or foreign-controlled LLCs—key procedural elements needed for comprehensive implementation. The enumeration of the rule itself is clear, but the machinery to enforce it against sophisticated indirect schemes is absent.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: The statute prohibits foreign currency contributions above $50 and requires disclosure of contributor identity and address for contributions over $250, but it does not mandate any affirmative verification procedure by campaign committees to confirm that contributors are not foreign-source persons (as defined by federal law). The text requires reporting of what was received but does not establish a statutory verification or attestation protocol that committees must follow to comply with the foreign-source bar.

The section mandates that the Secretary of State publish instructions on record preservation and bookkeeping methods, and the State Election Commission must monitor financial records and maintain audit documentation. However, the statute itself does not enumerate specific retention periods, record categories (contributor lists, expenditure documentation, bank statements), or direct obligations on candidates to retain records—it delegates those details to administrative instructions and rules rather than codifying them in statute.

“Prepare and publish instructions setting forth methods of bookkeeping and preservation of records to facilitate compliance with this article and to explain the duties of candidates and others participating in elections under this article”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 3-12-10 establishes certification procedures, payment distribution, and candidate compliance verification for public campaign financing eligibility, but does not impose mandatory audit requirements on campaign-committee records. The section grants the State Election Commission discretion to verify compliance 'by using the verification and sampling techniques approved by the State Election Commission' (subsection c), but this is administrative discretion rather than a statutory mandate for post-election audits, threshold-triggered audits, or routine audit cycles. No audit-access requirements or record-retention schedules tied to audit obligations are specified in this section.