Archive · 16 Sep 2026
Montana Voters Test New Corporate Election Spending Limits
Montana voters will decide whether companies and some organizations can spend money in elections.
The proposal is called Initiative 194, or the Montana Plan.
Supporters say large amounts of hidden money can make ordinary voters feel powerless.
They want to stop corporations from anonymously influencing elections.
The plan would not stop wealthy people from spending their own money.
However, those people could no longer spend it anonymously through covered organizations.
Business groups say the plan may violate free-speech rights.
Legal experts disagree about whether the measure could survive a court challenge.
Similar efforts are being considered in many other states.
Montana voters will decide in November whether to prohibit corporations and other artificial persons from spending money on elections.
Initiative 194 seeks to work around Citizens United by regulating corporate powers granted by states rather than directly overturning corporate speech rights.
Supporters say the measure could reduce dark money and outside influence, while business groups argue it is unconstitutional and could limit free speech.
The initiative has backing from Democrat Sam Forstag and former Republican Governor Marc Racicot, but the state Republican Party and some business groups oppose it.
Versions of the proposal are active or under consideration in about 32 states, potentially setting up another Supreme Court battle.
- Who
- Montana voters, initiative supporters including Sam Forstag and Marc Racicot, and opponents including business groups and the state Republican Party.
- What
- Voters will decide whether Initiative 194 should bar corporations, unions, C4 organizations and other artificial persons from spending money on elections.
- When
- The vote is scheduled for November; the articles do not specify the year beyond describing the current election cycle.
- Where
- Montana, with similar efforts active or under consideration in about 32 states.
- Why
- Supporters seek to limit corporate and anonymous election spending and reduce outside influence; opponents say the measure threatens free-speech rights and is unconstitutional.
Supporters of Initiative 194
Opponents of Initiative 194
Corporate influence
Supporters of Initiative 194
Supporters say corporate and dark-money spending gives outside interests too much influence and leaves voters feeling powerless.
Opponents of Initiative 194
Opponents emphasize that organizations use political spending to educate the public and participate in debates over ballot measures.
Constitutionality
Supporters of Initiative 194
Supporters say the initiative uses states' authority to define or revoke corporate powers, avoiding a direct challenge to Citizens United.
Opponents of Initiative 194
The Montana Chamber of Commerce calls the measure plainly unconstitutional, and some legal experts expect the Supreme Court's conservative majority to reject it.
Free speech and transparency
Supporters of Initiative 194
Supporters want to prevent covered organizations from spending anonymously while preserving the ability of wealthy individuals to spend openly.
Opponents of Initiative 194
Opponents and legal analysts warn that restricting organizational spending could conflict with the free-speech rights recognized for corporations and unions.
- Initiative
- Initiative 194, known as the Montana Plan
- Election timing
- Montana voters will decide the measure in November
- Covered entities
- Corporations, unions, C4 nonprofits and other artificial persons
- Federal precedent
- Citizens United allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited money independently in elections
- Montana spending
- Independent political expenditures rose from $33,000 in 2008 to $162 million in 2024, according to the Transparent Election Initiative
- National support
- A Brennan Center for Justice survey found 79% of Americans across parties supported an amendment restoring spending limits
- Broader effort
- Similar proposals are active or under consideration in about 32 states