A proposed Oregon constitutional amendment would ban corporations, unions and other organizations from spending money to influence elections.
The measure, filed Wednesday, Sept. 9, could reshape how Beaverton-headquartered Nike, Inc. and co-founder Phil Knight participate in state politics.
Knight has written multiple checks of $1 million or more to conservative candidates and causes in recent years, the Oregon Capital Chronicle reported.
The proposed 2028 ballot measure would strip that kind of corporate spending power by redefining what Oregon law allows corporations to do.
Portland attorney Jason Kafoury, the chief petitioner and an affiliate of Honest Elections Oregon, filed the amendment with the Oregon Elections Division.
The measure, titled "Stomp Out Dark Money in Oregon Elections," would add a new section to the state constitution declaring that corporations, nonprofits, LLCs and foreign entities doing business in Oregon do not possess the power to spend on politics.
"The concept here is we are going to put into the Oregon Constitution a thing saying you, as a corporation, do not have the power to spend on politics," Kafoury said.
A corporation that violates the ban would forfeit state-conferred privileges, including limited liability, and would have to surrender an amount equal to the funds it spent on political activity, according to the amendment text filed with the secretary of state. The measure would still allow corporations and unions to set up political action committees (PACs) and solicit contributions from members, shareholders and employees.
A challenge to Citizens United
The Oregon proposal mirrors a Hawaii law signed by Gov. Josh Green on May 14 and a Montana ballot measure heading to voters in November. All three attempt to circumvent the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC), which allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited money on elections.
That theory faces an early test. The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii filed a federal lawsuit on June 5 challenging Hawaii's law as unconstitutional. The outcome could determine whether Oregon's measure survives legal scrutiny.
Why it matters locally
Oregon has had no campaign contribution limits, meaning wealthy individuals and businesses could give large sums directly to campaigns. Limits that the Oregon Capital Chronicle reported will take effect in 2027 will cap individual donations at $3,300 per election. Membership organizations such as labor unions will be able to give up to $26,400 per two-year cycle to statewide candidates.
Some legislators who voted for those 2024 limits worried the caps could push spending into harder-to-track independent expenditures. The new ballot measure aims to close that door for corporate and organizational money.
Not everyone in the progressive coalition is on board.
Kelsey Paden, executive director of Our Oregon, said in a statement that the group shares the goal of curbing corporate influence but warned the measure could silence grassroots organizing by unions and membership groups that collect small donations.
Oregon Business and Industry, the state's largest business lobby, did not respond to questions about the amendment as of Wednesday, the Oregon Capital Chronicle reported. House Speaker Julie Fahey's chief of staff said in an email that Fahey had not yet reviewed the language but called the Hawaii and Montana approaches "intriguing" and said she would follow the legal developments.
Kafoury and other petitioners plan to file two more constitutional amendments in coming weeks: one to rework Oregon's 2024 campaign finance law and another to create a statewide "Democracy Vouchers" program modeled on Seattle's system. The measure must gather sufficient signatures to qualify for the 2028 ballot.
