Accessibility:
Top States |
1.
Washington |
Grade:
A+ |
2.
Ohio |
Grade:
A+ |
3.
Oregon |
Grade:
A+ |
Most
Improved States |
Since
2007 |
Since
2003 |
1.
West Virginia |
1.
Tennessee |
2.
Arkansas |
2.
Oregon |
3.
Tennessee |
3.
South Carolina |
|
Fifteen states
earned As in the Disclosure Content Accessibility category in 2008,
up from 13 last year and just seven in the initial 2003 assessment.
While Hawaii slipped from the A range, three states moved up from
Bs to As in 2008 (Georgia, Illinois, and Oregon). Three states
earned Cs and five earned Ds. Fourteen states earned failing grades
in the accessibility category in 2008, ten less than in 2003. Three
states earned passing accessibility grades for the first time in
2008 (Arkansas, South Carolina, and West Virginia) while Connecticut
dropped from a D in 2007 to an F.
Forty-nine
states now offer the pubic the ability to view campaign finance
data online, with all 50 states scheduled to be doing so by
2010. Forty-nine states provide online access to itemized campaign
contribution data, and 47 post itemized campaign expenses.
Montana posted campaign finance data to its disclosure web
site for the first time in 2008, while Wyoming remains the
only state without an online disclosure program (though legislation
passed in 2008 will bring campaign finance data online in 2010).
Electronically-filed
campaign finance reports are far more likely to be instantly
accessible online in formats that are easy to read, search,
sort, or download than those filed on paper. |
|
While there
are many options for publishing disclosure data online, electronically-filed
campaign finance reports are far more likely to be instantly
accessible online in formats that are easy to read, search,
sort, or download than those filed on paper. States that offer
dynamic tools for searching, sorting, and downloading data
through their disclosure web sites perform best in the accessibility
category.
- States
that provide the best access to campaign finance records,
in rank order, are: Washington; Ohio; Oregon; Michigan, Rhode
Island and Texas (tied for 4th); California, Florida and
Maryland (tied for 7th); and Illinois and Pennsylvania (tied
for 10th).
- The ten
states with the weakest access to campaign finance records,
in rank order from 41 to 50, are: Connecticut; Vermont; Iowa;
Montana; Nevada; Mississippi; Alabama and Delaware (tied
for 47th); South Dakota; and Wyoming.
Significant
2008 findings:
- 49 states
post campaign finance data on their disclosure web sites;
- 1 state
(Wyoming) does not currently make campaign finance data available
online, but will begin to do so in 2010;
- 39 states
provide online, searchable databases of campaign contributions;
- 27 states
provide online, searchable databases of campaign expenditures;
- 35 states
allow campaign finance data to be downloaded from their web
sites in a spreadsheet format;
- 28 states
allow campaign finance data to be sorted online;
- 40 states
post campaign finance data online within 48 hours of receipt;
and
- 41 states
offer campaign data on disk.
Significant
changes since 2007:
- 1 state
began posting campaign finance data online for the first
time (Montana);
- 4 states
added new online, searchable databases of campaign contributions
(Arkansas, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and West Virginia);
- 5 states
added additional search fields to their online contributions
databases (Georgia, New Jersey, Oregon, South Carolina, and
Tennessee);
- 3 states
created new online, searchable databases of campaign expenditures
(South Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia);
- 8 states
reported posting campaign data online more quickly than in
2007 (Kentucky, Mississippi, North Dakota, New Hampshire,
Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Utah);
- 5 states
added the ability to sort campaign finance data online (Arkansas,
New Hampshire, South Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia);
and
- 7 states
added the ability to download campaign finance data from
their web sites (Arkansas, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri,
New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Tennessee).
Online,
Searchable Databases
Best
Searchable Databases of Contributions & Expenditures |
- California
- Georgia
- Illinois
- Michigan
- North
Carolina
- Ohio
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Washington
|
|
The most user-friendly
tool for disclosure agencies to offer the public is an online,
searchable database of campaign contributions and expenditures.
Comprehensive databases allow users to search data by numerous
fields (such as contributor name, employer, zip code, contribution
date, and amount) and offer the ability to search across all candidates’ data,
or limit the search to the records of a single candidate. Along
with multiple search fields, the most user-friendly databases also
offer search options like “name contains” or “name
begins with”, and allow data to be to sorted and downloaded.
Nine states’ databases meet all of this study’s criteria
for database search options and also allow data to be either sorted
or downloaded (California, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, North Carolina,
Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington).
click
image to enlarge
Thirty-nine
states (78 percent) now offer online, searchable databases
of campaign contributions, up from 27 states (54 percent) in
2003. Arkansas, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and West Virginia
debuted new databases in the past year while Georgia, New Jersey,
Oregon, South Carolina, and Tennessee added new search options.
South Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia also launched
new searchable databases of campaign expenses on their web
sites, bringing the total to 27 states with this resource,
ten more than in 2003. Of the 39 states with a searchable database,
36 allow users to either sort or download campaign finance
data; of the states without searchable databases, only two
(Vermont and Wisconsin) allow users to download data and none
allow users to sort data online.
The presence
of electronic filing programs, especially those that are mandatory,
contribute greatly to a state’s ability to offer campaign
finance data in formats that can be searched, sorted, or downloaded.
Mandatory electronic filing reduces the number of reports filed
on paper, thereby allowing disclosure agencies to dedicate
more resources to data presentation, rather than data-entry.
Searchable contribution databases are available in 93 percent
of states with mandatory electronic filing programs, while
two-thirds of states with voluntary programs offer this resource.
Three of the eight states (38 percent) without electronic filing
programs data-enter contributions and allow the public to search
the data online (Idaho, North Dakota, and Nebraska).
Percentage
of States with Online, Searchable Databases,
by Electronic Filing Status |
|
Mandatory
E-Filing States |
Voluntary
E-Filing States |
States
with
No E-Filing |
Contribution
Databases |
93% |
67% |
38% |
Expenditure
Databases |
83% |
17% |
0% |
Mandatory
electronic filing has an even more pronounced effect on states
providing databases of campaign expenditures. Eighty-three
percent of states with mandatory electronic filing programs
also offer online, searchable expenditure databases as opposed
to just 17 percent of states with voluntary programs. None
of the states that lack an electronic filing program offer
online, searchable databases of campaign expenditures.
Other
Methods of Online Disclosure
In the absence
of electronically-filed data, states can still provide online
access to campaign finance data. Reports filed on paper can
be scanned and posted online as PDF documents or data-entered
and displayed as PDF or HTML pages. HTML displays of records
are more user-friendly and easier to read than typed or handwritten
reports that have been scanned and posted online. Vermont creates
downloadable text files of statewide candidates’ reports,
giving the public an alternative to the cumbersome TIFF files
that are also available. Alabama, Mississippi, and South Dakota
post copies of scanned reports online as PDF files, some of
which are difficult to read due to scan quality and handwriting
legibility.
Timeliness
of Online Disclosure
The ability
to review campaign finance reports online as they are filed
is far more convenient for the public than visiting a disclosure
agency or state archive during business hours to request and
review paper reports. Forty of the 49 states posting campaign
finance data on the web report doing so either within two days
of receiving a report or within two days of the filing deadline,
and all states (with the exception of New Mexico) are able
to post campaign finance data on the web within a week of receipt.
Eight states reported posting campaign finance records on the
Internet more quickly than in 2007.
Access
to Records on Paper and Disk
As electronic
filing has become more common, states continue to report a
decrease in requests for paper copies of disclosure reports.
All states charge a fee per copy, with most between $.10 and
$.25 per page, though some states fulfill small requests for
copies of disclosure reports for free. Ohio offers the lowest
rate at $.03 per page while Alabama and South Dakota each charge
$1.00 per page, the highest in the country. Wyoming, the only
state that does not publish campaign finance data online, charges
$.15 per page for most copies of disclosure reports. In 2008,
Iowa reduced the cost of copies mailed to requestors from $.20
per page to $.15 per page and dropped the price for copies
made in person from $.10 to $.05 per page.
Forty-one
states also offer the public the ability to access large amounts
of campaign finance data in other digital formats, such as
through email or on a CD, a format that more easily allows
for large-scale analysis of several candidates’ records
or all campaign committees’ reports for a given election
cycle. Montana and Oklahoma reported making this option available
for the first time in 2008, while Maryland and Nevada reported
lower charges for data on disk than in the past.
|