Garden State Times

Assemblyman Greg McGuckin has introduced a bill that aims to reverse several provisions of a contentious law, following recommendations from the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission. Critics have argued that this law weakened the independent elections watchdog and allowed for political corruption.

The Elections Transparency Act, which overhauled New Jersey's campaign finance rules, was passed last year along party lines. The legislation removed protections against corruption, revealed loopholes in pay-to-play regulations, limited ELEC's ability to investigate violations, and raised donation limits to candidates and committees run by party leaders.

McGuckin (R-Ocean) commended the commission for advocating these changes, stating, "I commend the commission for calling for these changes that will fix what Democrats did to tip the scales in their favor under the guise of increasing transparency." He further noted that the legislature often passes laws and then amends them when the consequences of flawed measures become apparent.

Last year saw South Jersey political bosses supporting a dark money group to fund phantom candidates and assist Democrats in winning competitive districts in November elections. Outside political groups' spending was second highest in state-level election history, with donor disclosure only occurring post-election.

McGuckin's bill (A4431) implements three recommendations made by ELEC in its annual report aimed at enhancing reporting requirements, aiding violation investigations, and increasing transparency. "The recommendations in my bill are commonsense and I hope they will be embraced by both sides of the aisle as the public’s distrust in government grows," said McGuckin.

Under this proposed legislation, dark money groups would be required to report campaign contributions and expenditures more frequently and swiftly before an election. Furthermore, it would extend ELEC's statute of limitations for investigating campaign finance violations from two years to four. Finally, it would resolve a conflict between election-related disclosure requirements and redactions mandated under Daniel’s law that protects certain public official’s personal information.

McGuckin concluded, "This measure makes it clear where lawmakers stand – either with their constituents or with corruption. Are they public officials with principles or political cronies? It’s time to find out."