PASSAGE OF LAW LEAVES QUESTIONS

The Missouri Attorney General's office has been asked to clarify issues about Proposition A, a campaign-finance measure approved by voters Nov. 8.

The proposition was put on the ballot through initiative petitions.

Not only are there questions with how Proposition A should be implemented, but also how it relates to a campaign-finance reform measure approved by the legislature earlier this year.

The Missouri Ethics Commission received an opinion Nov. 10 from Attorney General Jay Nixon stating that Proposition A took effect upon passage.

But because the legislature's new campaign-finance law doesn't take effect until Jan. 1, there is some question whether it would supersede Proposition A.

Senate President James Mathewson has asked Nixon for an opinion on which measure has precedence.

Nixon said Friday he hadn't finished his opinion on Mathewson's request and other questions that had been raised, but expected something to be ready by the middle part of this week.

"We have a number of opinion requests that are in," Nixon said. "The parameter we are trying to decide in is to give as much weight as possible to the vote of the people, while at the same time keeping in mind both of these are statutes."

The normal way to deal with two statutes is to reconcile differences and take the toughest provision of each that is enforceable, Nixon explained.

Nixon wants to move quickly so candidates and officeholders know where they stand. For example, as of Nov. 8, candidates for statewide offices have gone from being able to receive unlimited contributions to being able to receive $300 per individual.

Proposition A also limits the amount of money kept in campaign accounts and gives officeholders 90 days to reduce their accounts to levels not greater than 10 times the maximum contribution they can receive.

Nixon hasn't yet dealt with that issue, but will have an opinion soon.

"Each one of these provisions has to be looked at very carefully," he said. "We want to work with the ethics commission to outline what is prohibited and to enforce prohibited actions."

Chris Sifford, communications director for Gov. Mel Carnahan, said there is a lot of confusion about what Proposition A means and how any legal problems should be cleared up.

"It is more confusing than anything," he said. "We are just trying to figure out how to comply and what we need to do to comply. There definitely needs to be some clarification on how these two laws mesh and what it all means."

Rep. Larry Thomason, D-Kennett, the House majority whip, said many questions are in the hands of the attorney general at this point.

"We don't know the rules, that's the real thing," he said. "Once you know the rules you can do a whole lot, but at this point we don't know the rules."

Proposition A limits individual contributions to $300 for statewide officials, and $200 for candidates for the Senate and $100 for the Missouri House.

Some criticisms of Proposition A are that it doesn't limit independent expenditures for candidates, has unrealistic limits on contributions, and places no limit on the amount a person can spend of his own money to seek public office.

Thomason said lawmakers may have to look at resolving some of the differences between the two laws, but admits such an effort would be awkward because voters approved Proposition A.

Nixon's legal opinions won't focus on loopholes in Proposition A but rather on what it means.

"Missouri has gone from the least restrictive laws in the country on campaign finance to the most stringent laws in the country (with) both spending and contribution limits," he said. "My job is to defend whatever that law is."

Once the rules are clear, Thomason said, legislators can begin taking steps to comply.