You can't win if you don't have money

A complaint filed with the Internal Revenue Service against a “dark money” group that spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in the 2014 governor’s race appears to provide a stark example of the way new campaign finance laws could bar Arizona election officials from punishing a violation, even when it’s right in front of their faces.

If organizers of a citizen referendum against SB1516 fail to convince voters to reject the broad-based campaign finance overhaul, the consequences could be far worse for them than the passage of laws they consider detrimental to Arizona’s future.

Arizonans could get the last word on whether to uphold or reject newly enacted campaign finance laws that would allow more “dark money” to flow into state elections.

A planned citizen referendum to reverse legislation that would make it easier to spend dark money in Arizona may be about to become twice as difficult.

The so-called “kingmaker” provision in a controversial campaign finance law that takes effect later this year may have to be downgraded to “princemaker” status, thanks to a proposed change being considered by lawmakers.

Under S1516, some candidates are more equal than others

A massive overhaul of Arizona’s campaign finance laws contains a largely overlooked bonus for statewide officials and some others who will be allowed to raise twice as much money from individual contributors than they are now.

Congressional candidates filed their first fundraising reports of 2016, giving a sneak peek at who has the cash to run for Congress and who is lagging behind.

In the past, most lawmakers who ran for Congress have avoided the dilemma of whether they could or should accept money from lobbyists by simply resigning from the Legislature.