WV House Republicans join Dems 54-41 to reject bill allowing direct corporate political donations
The West Virginia House of Delegates on Thursday rejected a bill that would have allowed businesses and corporations in the state to directly donate up to $2,800 — and potentially more, according to statements — to political candidates.
With five members absent and not voting, the body voted 54-41 against House Bill 2719. It was the first time this session that a majority of Republicans in the House sided with Democrats against legislation and the first bill in either chamber this year to be denied through a floor vote.
HB 2719 would have removed language in state code that barred corporations, 'membership organizations' and businesses from donating directly to political candidates. The proposed code would have allowed any business incorporated by the West Virginia Secretary of State's Office to give up to $2,800 to a candidate per an election cycle. There were no limits included in the proposed code on how many businesses owned by one person would have been able to donate politically. Through the legislation, business owners could have given the maximum amount of money to candidates multiple times by donating through their businesses, individual giving and political action committees.
Those who supported the legislation said it would increase transparency for corporate political giving in the state as, for the first time, money given by businesses would be listed and made public through financial disclosures instead of being siphoned through a Political Action Committee or Super PAC (often referred to as 'dark money' since there is no way to see where the money comes from). Any funds given by corporations would have also still needed to meet limits set in state code.
Del. Jordan Maynor, R-Raleigh, serves as vice chair of the House Judiciary committee and was a sponsor of the legislation. While eight legislators in total spoke on HB 2719 Thursday, Maynor was one of only two lawmakers to urge passage of the bill before it died.
'All the bluster we're hearing about how this opens us up to more money in politics — [corporations] can do that right now, except there is no transparency with what they give now because they give to big money political action committees that are in the dark,' Maynor said. 'This is a transparency bill … When you're going through campaign finance reports, it shows — because it's transparent — the businesses that gave to your campaign and that support you.'
But the majority who voted down the legislation held deep concerns about how the bill would inject more money into politics, giving wider influence to those who could afford to buy favor and interest versus those who couldn't but would be forced to live with the consequences.
'This is precisely the direction that we should not be going. No one at home wants more money in politics,' said House Minority Leader Sean Hornbuckle, D-Cabell. 'We have this fascination with money and greed. What happens is, we don't get elected officials based upon merit or what they can do — because it's a rich man's game. That's all it is. So effectively, we're not representing the people at home because [elections are] going to the highest bidder.'
Del. Henry Dillon, R-Wayne, said the proposed bill wasn't the kind that his constituents sent him to Charleston to pass. Even more, he said, it would be insulting to approve legislation that gives corporations and wealthy people more of a say in who is elected to represent them than the majority of residents who are often struggling to stay afloat.
'We were sent here to help the average voter, constituents in our districts for who $2,800 toward politics — they can't even begin to afford to part with that type of money,' Dillon said. 'And yet we're going to open up new avenues for people who have ample resources, virtually unlimited resources, to influence our elections? … Is this going to make life better for our constituents?'
Del. Mike Hornby, R-Berkeley, said during questioning on the floor from Del. Mike Pushkin, D-Kanawha, that originally, there was a $250 limit on corporate giving in the bill. But that cap had to be removed from the proposed bill, Hornby said, as 'we must treat everybody the same' in campaign finance code.
Hornby — who is the lead sponsor of the bill — is listed by the Secretary of State as the incorporator of numerous media and communications companies in West Virginia, though several are currently out of compliance or have had their registrations revoked by the SOS due to a failure to file annual reports. He said while he 'generally tries to stay out of elections' through his businesses, he believed a political candidate should be able to 'have a business support them.'
When asked by Pushkin who pushed for the introduction and passage of this legislation — citizen-led lobbying groups, certain businesses, a corporation or anyone else — Hornby's answer was brief.
'Nobody asked for this,' he said.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump target on mail-in ballots stokes controversy in Nevada, nationwide
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — President Donald Trump on Monday reignited controversy over how Americans vote, announcing plans on Truth Social to 'lead a movement' to eliminate mail-in ballots and certain voting machines ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Trump is preparing an executive order to mandate the change. However, legal experts warn he lacks the constitutional authority. 'Mail in ballots are corrupt you can never have a real democracy with mail in ballots,' Trump said. Trump said the voting machines that count those mail-in ballots are highly inaccurate. Democrats showed a stronger preference for mail ballots in the 2024 primary, with 79% of their votes cast via mail, compared to 60% of Republicans. 'We would get secure elections and much faster results. The machines say we will get the results in two weeks but with paper ballots you have the results that night,' Trump said. Statistics show 45% of the votes cast in the 2024 election in Nevada were mail ballots. Legal experts say any executive order Trump signs would almost certainly face lawsuits, and with primaries already on the horizon, it's unlikely states could overhaul their election systems in time, even if the courts allowed it. 'Nevadans have accepted and adopted mail in ballots, and the reason is Nevada is a 24/7 economy. We are a working community. We want to have as many people participate in the process as possible,' Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar said. Aguilar said when you take away the accessibility of mail-in ballots, it hurts the future of our state. 'Mail ballots are determined in Nevada by the legislature and the governor. Until they decide we're going to have a different process, we are going to continue with mail ballots,' Aguilar said. Trump's pledge to target mail-in ballots signals that election rules will remain a hot topic heading into next year's midterms. For now, though, the secretary of state said the chances of a nationwide ban appear slim. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas unveils state maps that could give Republicans 5 more US House seats
WASHINGTON — Republicans could secure five more House seats in Texas after the state unveiled its proposed map for the 2026 midterm elections, following through with demands from President Donald Trump to find some cushion room protecting the party's slim majority. The Texas state legislature revealed the new boundaries on Wednesday, altering the map to create new districts in areas that Trump carried by more than 10 points in the 2024 election. Most of the new districts also reside in heavily Hispanic areas, a crucial demographic shift that helped secure Trump's victory in November — a risky gamble if Hispanic voters lean back toward Democratic candidates next year. The maps come as state lawmakers meet for an emergency session, which is scheduled to end on Aug. 19. However, Democrats in the legislature are considering whether to stage a walkout, denying Republicans the minimum attendance required to consider legislation. If the map is approved and no House members move districts, the new boundaries also set the stage for half a dozen incumbent-on-incumbent matchups next year. Republicans currently hold a 219-212 majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, a historically slim margin that has often made it difficult for the party to advance legislation even with a Republican trifecta. With control of the White House and Senate, Republicans have enjoyed total control of Washington — something that is at risk next November. Historical trends show that the party of the sitting president typically loses control of the House during midterm elections. If Democrats manage to flip the House, it would deal a massive blow to Trump and likely thwart his agenda for his final two years. But Democrats have made clear they won't just accept new maps without any defense mechanism of their own. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is expected to meet with Democratic state lawmakers on Wednesday to discuss a path forward as party leaders openly toy with the idea of revising other state maps in their favor. The top House Democrat said earlier this month he would engage in conversations with state delegations to 'explore what the opportunities and possibilities are in order to make sure that the congressional map in 2026 is as fair as possible.' Although Republicans may not face as many legal or political obstacles in Texas, they are likely to experience some voter backlash — potentially putting their majority at risk anyway. The state legislature sought to redraw the congressional map in 2011 to secure Republican-safe seats, only to watch those be flipped by Democrats in the so-called 'blue wave' of 2018. As a result, state Republicans were more careful when they adjusted the map in 2021 to preserve the GOP stronghold districts. Now, if Republicans attempt to drastically change the maps, they could face a similar defeat in 2026.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
As Democrats wage national redistricting war, Republicans may have the upper hand
WASHINGTON — As California legislators begin the process of reconfiguring its congressional districts and creating a more Democratic-friendly map in next year's midterms, the party could be pushing itself into a national redistricting war — and one that would likely hold them at a disadvantage. The California Legislature will work to pass its proposed version of the state's congressional map this week, which would give Democrats an advantage in five additional House seats in the state. After that, the revised map will be on the ballot in November when California voters participate in a special election for municipal races. That means Democrats' attempt to thwart Republican redistricting efforts in other states, namely Texas, where President Donald Trump is pushing for Republicans to draw more GOP-friendly districts, will come down to whether California leaders can convince enough voters to support the gambit. And that may be easier said than done. Even if California is successful and counteracts the five seats Republicans say they'll flip in the Lone Star State, it could ignite efforts in other states to redraw their maps for partisan leverage. Doing so would be an easier fight for Republican-led states than those led by Democrats, largely because of the laws put in place by party leaders to avoid this exact situation. Democrats face more obstacles than Republicans in redrawing maps As state leaders threaten a redraw of their maps, Republicans have an advantage over their Democratic counterparts due to local laws impeding partisan gerrymandering attempts. Most redistricting efforts are completed through state legislatures and more easily accomplished in states with single-party control, meaning one party controls both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's mansion. In that category, Republicans have the trifecta advantage: There are 26 states under complete GOP control compared to just 15 under complete Democratic control. Once you factor out the states that don't have split congressional representation — for example, Utah, which only has Republican seats so a map redraw wouldn't do anything to change the calculus — you are down to 15 red states and eight blue states with seats available to flip. Even then, at least four of those Democratic-led states require independent commissions (or some hybrid system with state legislators) to change congressional maps in the middle of the decade. That complicates their efforts while the Republican states would only require their legislatures to do the heavy lifting. 'Even if (Democrats) are hell bent on doing this, I don't think it's going to be a very easy thing for them to do as a matter of their various state laws,' John Malcom, the vice president of the conservative Heritage Foundation's Institute for Constitutional Government, told the Deseret News in an interview. 'It's not going to be easy for them to do, and they have less room to maneuver because they've already done a remarkably effective job of redistricting (some states) in a way that … dilutes Republican votes.' California gambles with those obstacles in place Unlike a majority of states, California hands the power of map-drawing not to state legislators but instead to an independent redistricting commission that is meant to draw nonpartisan boundaries based purely on population data. The commission was first enacted in 2010 and is made up of five Republicans, five Democrats and four voters who are not affiliated with either of the major parties. California is mandated by its state constitution to utilize the commission only once a decade, and it already did so in 2021. In order to work around this, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced last week he would introduce a constitutional amendment circumventing those laws. The catch: California voters, who largely support the independent commission, have to approve throwing away the panel's nonpartisan maps until after the census is taken again in 2030 and new maps are drawn for the 2032 election cycle. A recent Politico/Citrin Center/Possibility Lab survey found 64% of voters support keeping the independent commission, compared to just 36% who said state lawmakers should draw the maps. But some members of the commission who drew the current boundaries support throwing out the map, with the agreement that the panel will be reinstated later. But even with that endorsement, Republicans plan to fight back with accusations that Democrats are defying the will of the voters. 'I think that it will be seen as a negatively partisan thing if they try to go back on what the voters only recently approved,' Malcolm told the Deseret News. 'But you know, Gavin Newsom is making it very clear that the lane he wants to run for president in is the 'I'm the anti-Trump guy.' And so being nakedly partisan is not something that Gavin Newsom is going to shy away from.' Still, Democrats could have some luck as nearly half of the state's voters belong to the party compared to just 24.7% who are registered Republicans, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. Another 21.9% identify as independents. California and Texas could set off firestorm in other states With Texas expected to approve its new map as early as this week and California moving full steam ahead on its proposal this fall, the boundary battle could elevate to an all-out war encompassing several states across the country. More than half a dozen states are publicly considering changes to their congressional maps next November in an attempt to gain leverage — especially as it becomes likely California will simply neutralize Texas and neither party will benefit. Democrats in New York have openly suggested they would look at ways to change congressional maps to squeeze out GOP lawmakers in vulnerable districts while Florida Republicans are considering the opposite in the Sunshine State. But other states are slowly entering the conversation, such as Indiana, where Republicans already hold a 7-2 advantage to Democrats. All seven of those House Republicans came out in support of redrawing the map on Monday after President Donald Trump began looking to the state as another opportunity to secure his majority. 'Now, with President Trump and the entire Hoosier Republican Congressional delegation expressing support for Congressional redistricting, the General Assembly should act swiftly to get the job done,' Rep. Marlin Stutzman, the first Indiana Republican to announce his support, said in a statement to the Deseret News. 'Hoosiers deserve Congressional districts that ensure voting records are reflected accurately in their Congressional districts.' Despite uphill battle, Democrats say they can't give up Although Democrats face more obstacles than Republicans, the redistricting battle is emerging as a war they must wage, strategists say — lest they risk an unenthusiastic base that has already expressed frustration the minority doesn't do enough to thwart Trump's agenda. 'The way I look at it, you have to fight fire with fire,' Brad Bannon, a Democratic strategist based in Washington, D.C., told the Deseret News. 'You just can't let the Republicans gerrymander their way to a House majority that they're going to have difficulty protecting.' Republicans currently hold a 219-212 majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, a historically slim margin that has often made it difficult for the party to advance legislation even with a Republican trifecta. With control of the White House and Senate, Republicans have enjoyed total control of Washington — something that is at risk next November. Historical trends show that the party of the sitting president typically loses control of the House during midterm elections. If Democrats manage to flip the House, it would deal a massive blow to Trump and likely thwart his agenda for his final two years. As a result, Trump is pressing state Republican leaders to deliver additional seats through redistricting — which some strategists say is a sign of political desperation and should motivate Democrats not to let up. 'Democrats have an opportunity to take back the House, and it won't stop the abuses in the Trump regime, but it will slow them down,' Bannon said. 'Democrats will have the opportunity to call hearings and investigations into the Trump administration, and I don't think we can afford to let that opportunity go by. So I think Democrats should go full steam ahead.'
