Amid legal concerns, WA suspends contribution limits for candidates and PACs

Washington state's campaign finance enforcers are allowing candidates for legislative and Supreme Court seats to spend as much of their own money on their campaigns in the final days of this election.

And the state Public Disclosure Commission is also not enforcing caps on how much money political committees not tied to a ballot measure can accept in the run-up to next week's election.

The citizen panel voted last week to suspend enforcement of the restrictions, amid ongoing concerns that the statute may not withstand a legal challenge.

"The law has not changed," said Natalie Johnson, spokesperson for the Public Disclosure Commission. "The commission is concerned that the law on the books is not enforceable and is telling staff to not enforce it."

At issue is a statute that limits contributions a committee can accept or a candidate can give themself in a short but critical period of time — seven days before a primary and 21 days before a general election. It sets the bar at $75,000 for those seeking legislative seats and statewide office, and $7,500 for a political committee or candidate running for a local office.

Limits on individual contributions to candidates are still in place. And, in the 21 days before the general election, all candidates and political committees must report contributions totaling $1,500 or more from one source within 48 hours of receiving it.

Though the commission decision was the product of a public conversation begun earlier this year, its timing so close to the Nov. 3 election vexed election professionals and political observers. Some warned it enables large sums of money to flow to political committees actively engaged in supporting and opposing candidates on Tuesday's ballot.

Dave Ammons, a retired reporter who served on the commission from 2017-21, said he was "perplexed and troubled" by the commission action in a post on Facebook.

"The trouble with huge late infusions of money is that they can influence outcomes that may not be known until after the election," he said. "I wouldn't bend the knee to court challenges unless there is a direct court order in a live case."

Such an infusion appeared to have occurred Monday when Washington Needs to Compete , a business-backed committee that's raised in excess of $13 million, funneled $100,000 to Jobs PAC, another business-funded committee that's spent money supporting and opposing an array of legislative candidates.

Republican consultant Chad Minnick said while there may be a handful of contributions like that, he didn't think this suspension of limits would matter much because it occurred so late. In the future, however, political committees can prepare and strategize.

"To have much impact you need to have money a few weeks out. At this stage most of the people have made up their minds," he said.

Dean Nielsen, a consultant for Democratic candidates this cycle, had a similar take.

"I don't really think it will matter a lot this year because everyone was operating under the 21-day rubric," he said. "But I do think it will have a major application for the future."

In acting last week, commissioners sought fairness. They wanted to avert a situation where some candidates and committees are aware contribution restrictions are not being enforced and others are not.

Conner Edwards, a campaign finance activist who has filed hundreds of complaints in recent years, said it was "unfair" the decision came more than halfway through the 21-day pre-election period.

"Whether you agree or disagree with the courts, the reality is that if someone actually fought the PDC on this issue, the PDC almost certainly would have lost," he said. "Considering that, I think the agency probably made the right decision."

A conundrum for the commission

The decision to not enforce can be traced to a complaint filed against a judicial candidate in 2025 by a political consulting firm whose clients include Gov. Bob Ferguson.

Snohomish County District Court Judge Tam Bui and Superior Court Judge Karen Moore were competing in a special election for Washington Court of Appeals Division I, a contest that Bui won.

On Oct. 24, 10 days before the 2025 election, Bui paid $41,000 for last-minute mailers. That triggered a complaint from Erin Schultz of NWP Consulting, the firm founded by Christian Sinderman who was the architect of Ferguson's 2024 gubernatorial campaign.

The in-kind contribution "gives the candidate an unfair advantage during the final days of voting and undermines the transparency and integrity" of the state's campaign finance statutes, Schultz alleged.

Bui's lawyers pushed back, pointing out the U.S. Supreme Court in Buckley v. Valeo in 1976 struck down federal limits on candidates funding their own campaigns.

That wasn't the only reason commission staff had concerns. In 2011, the commission lost a case in which it tried to defend limits on contributions by individuals to ballot measure committees. As a result of that setback, those committees have been exempt.

In June, when the commission dismissed the complaint against Bui, the fallibility of the law came up again.

"This case has presented a bit of a conundrum for us as staff," said Executive Director Peter Frey Lavallee. He suggested asking the Legislature for clarification when it next convenes.

He said the attorney general's office refrained from opining on the constitutionality but had cautioned that "this is not a great statute to be trying to enforce."

Nielsen was Bui's campaign consultant and knows commissioners have struggled with what to do with the law.

"I actually did not think they would do it," he said of suspending enforcement. "I don't think people were clamoring for it to end. They always push for transparency and accountability, I thought they'd be stubborn until somebody sued them."