Table of Contents
Do not index
Transparent Election Initiative: Hawaii Lawsuit Shows Why Voters - Not Corporations - Must Decide The Montana Plan
HELENA, Montana — A federal lawsuit by out-of-state litigators challenging Hawaii’s new corporate political spending law is exactly what supporters of The Montana Plan expected — and, they say, exactly why voters should decide whether corporations receive the power to spend in elections.
The Institute for Free Speech, a Washington-based legal group that has challenged campaign-finance and transparency laws across the country, has filed suit to overturn Hawaii’s Act 11, the first state law to put into effect an idea advanced nationally by the Transparent Election Initiative: corporations are creatures of state law, and they hold only the powers the people choose to grant them.
Hawaii’s law was directly inspired by the Montana effort. The Transparent Election Initiative, the organization advocating this approach nationwide, offered support throughout Hawaii’s legislative process and worked with Hawaii’s good-government caucus to help pass the law. Now, national litigators are trying to strike it down.
“The Hawaii lawsuit is no surprise,” said Jeff Mangan, president of the Transparent Election Initiative and lead petitioner for I-194. “Corporations and billionaires have had a vice grip on the machinery of democracy for generations, and they are not going to let go politely. That is exactly why voters need the chance to decide this question for themselves.”
In Montana, that same legal approach is moving forward through I-194, the citizen initiative supported by The Montana Plan ballot committee. The measure would make clear that artificial persons chartered or recognized by Montana do not receive the state-conferred power to spend treasury money in candidate elections, party politics, or state and local ballot-issue campaigns. Montanans would remain free to speak, give, join, and organize, and political committees would remain free to spend. What I-194 does not do is hand a corporate treasury a state-granted political checkbook.
The Montana effort has already survived attempts to keep voters from weighing in. This spring, a coalition of industry groups asked the Montana Supreme Court to block I-194 before it could reach the ballot. The Court dismissed that challenge, declining to short-circuit the initiative process before Montanans had a chance to vote.
The Court has also recognized the central legal distinction behind the Montana approach. In Transparent Election Initiative v. Knudsen, a related case involving the constitutional version of the measure, the Montana Supreme Court rejected the Attorney General’s attempt to keep that proposal from moving forward under the separate-vote requirement and recognized that the measure “speaks only to powers, not rights.” That distinction is the heart of the Montana Plan: people have constitutional rights, while corporations and other artificial entities have powers granted by the state that creates or recognizes them.
“We are confident courts will understand the difference,” Mangan said. “This does not silence anyone or tell Montanans what they can say. It simply says that when Montana creates or recognizes an artificial person, political spending is not one of the powers Montana grants.”
Montana has fought this battle before. In 1912, voters passed the Corrupt Practices Act by citizen initiative to drive Copper King money out of state politics. That law stood for nearly a century before Citizens United and the cases that followed swept away traditional controls on corporate political spending.
The Montana Plan takes a different path for a different legal era. Rather than trying to regulate corporate political spending after the fact, I-194 asks a more basic question: why should Montana grant that power to corporations in the first place?
“Every American knows the feeling that the system is rigged,” Mangan said. “Every Montanan knows what it feels like when the biggest bank accounts get the loudest voice. This issue is essential because it goes to the heart of self-government: do we still have a democracy run by people, or do we have one run by corporate treasuries?”
I-194 has been approved for signature gathering, and The Montana Plan campaign is in its final stretch before the June 19 deadline. If supporters submit enough valid signatures, Montanans will decide the measure at the November 2026 election.
“Montanans deserve to vote on this,” Mangan said. “Not corporations. Not billionaire-funded legal groups. Not out-of-state litigators. The people of Montana. After all, that’s the whole point of The Montana Plan.”
The Montana Plan is urging registered Montana voters to find a place to sign I-194 by using sign.mttei.org before the June 19 deadline.
“Corporate and dark money have had their say for a long time,” Mangan said. “Now it is Montana’s turn.”
Written by