Skip to content

Missouri Governor Signs Bill Modifying Donor Privacy Act

New legislation amends state's Personal Privacy Protection Act, allowing disclosure in certain circumstances

Welcome to Our Donor Privacy and Disclosure Digest! This monthly newsletter provides news and information on key policy changes, a breakdown of state legislation, and an overview of pivotal legal decisions and case developments. In this issue, you’ll find:

  • Missouri enacts bill amending privacy act: Missouri governor signs legislation modifying the state’s Personal Privacy Protection Act.
  • In the courts: The latest on pivotal judicial decisions and developments across the country.
  • State by state: An analysis of this month’s state legislative activity, including bill status, topic, partisan sponsorship, and more.
  • What we’re reading: Keep up to date on the stories and analyses we’ve been reading this month.
  • Dig deeper: Want more information on the topics covered in this issue? We’ve got you covered.

Missouri enacts bill amending privacy act

“On July 6, Missouri Gov. Mike Parson (R) signed SB28, a bill modifying provisions of the state’s Personal Privacy Protection Act. Under the Act, government agencies are prohibited from disclosing information identifying a person as a member, supporter, or donor to a nonprofit organization. SB28 amends the Act by specifying disclosure requirements for tax credits, government contracts, and law enforcement investigations,” said Ballotpedia.

States have enacted more donor privacy and disclosure legislation this year than in the past three years, with the number of enacted bills increasing yearly since 2020. BALLOTPEDIA.

The Personal Privacy Protection Act was enacted through HB2400. Rep. Dan Houx (R) introduced the bill, which was originally related to retirement and welfare benefits plans, on Jan. 11, 2022. The state House passed the bill unanimously on April 4, and the state Senate passed an amended version 27-6 on May 6, with 10 Democrats and 17 Republicans voting for the bill. 

Rep. Jered Taylor (R) offered an amendment to the bill containing the Personal Privacy Protection Act on May 12. The amended legislation received bipartisan support in the House, with 28 Democrats and 101 Republicans voting in favor of the bill on May 12. Parson signed the bill into law on June 30. Five other states, Georgia, Indiana, New Hampshire, New York, and Virginia, also enacted donor privacy laws in 2022.

While supporters of the Act said it would protect donors’ ability to contribute to causes they support, critics said it could inhibit government functions and transparency, especially regarding records nonprofits are required to submit to obtain government contracts. In August 2022, Parson’s administration ended public access to state contract records through the Office of Administration’s website, increasing calls for legislation to clarify provisions of the Act. 

SB28 allows government agencies to disclose information with the written permission of all individuals who might be identified through the release. It also specifies that the Personal Privacy Protection Act does not prevent the disclosure of donor information contained in a financial interest statement. It creates additional exceptions to the Act for information disclosed as part of a legal investigation and records nonprofits submit to obtain government contracts. 

SB28 originally focused on regulating access to public records of the Missouri Highway Patrol. Sen. Justin Brown (R) introduced the bill on Jan. 4, 2023, and the Senate passed it on Feb. 3. Lawmakers added the provisions relating to donor privacy on May 1, and the bill passed the House of Representatives on May 10. 

“It allows the state to effectively partner with nonprofits while still protecting donor privacy. Office of Administration representative Chris Moreland said “the contracts’ website would be restored to its pre-Aug. 28, 2022, status, which would allow OA Purchasing to devote its limited staff resources to procurement rather than records requests,” said Supporters of SB28.

“The issue was with the interpretation of the existing act under the current administration, not with its language,” said Americans for Prosperity Missouri State Director Jeremy Cady.

“A number of states have passed similar laws. We haven’t seen these issues in other states. So we’re not entirely sure why this has become as much of an issue as it has been.” After SB28’s enactment, Cady said, “I’m just hopeful [SB28] provides the clarity needed to ensure the privacy of Missourians is protected while ensuring government remains open and transparent.” 

Missouri legislators introduced five donor privacy and disclosure bills this year, more than any other state except New York, where legislators introduced eight bills. Of these five bills, only SB28 passed both chambers of the legislature before the end of the state’s legislative session on May 12. Click here to view all the bills introduced in Missouri and elsewhere this year.

The map and charts below show donor privacy and disclosure bills introduced by state and enacted bills by partisan sponsorship from 2020 to 2023, respectively. BALLOTPEDIA.

In the courts

Groups file amended complaint in challenge to Arizona’s Proposition 211

On July 21, the attorney for plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Arizona’s Proposition 211 filed an amended complaint in the Maricopa County Superior Court. Proposition 211 requires persons or entities making independent expenditures of $50,000 or more on a statewide campaign, or $25,000 or more on a local campaign, to disclose the money’s original sources (defined as the persons or businesses that earned the money being spent). Voters approved the measure 72-28% on Nov. 8, 2022. 

On Dec. 13, 2022, the Center for Arizona Policy, Inc. and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club sued Gov. Katie Hobbs (D), arguing that the law “violates Arizonans’ right to speak freely by chilling donors from supporting causes they believe in and wish to support, lest their charitable giving become public knowledge.”

“The plaintiffs could file an amended complaint based on the law’s application if the organizations could show “reasonable probability that disclosure of its contributors’ names will subject them to threats, harassment, or reprisals from either government officials or private parties,” said Judge Scott McCoy, who dismissed the challenge on June 22.

Goldwater Institute Senior Attorney Scott Day Freeman, who represents the plaintiffs in the case, filed an amended complaint containing affidavits from Center for Arizona Policy President Cathi Herrod and Free Enterprise Club President Scot Mussi. 

“Harassment, often obscene, of me, as CAP’s public face, continues unabated on social media and through telephone calls to our office…If CAP were required to disclose confidential donor information, however, CAP’s donors would not be protected, and they are likely to face similar forms of retaliation for CAP’s positions, whether they agree with those positions,” said Herrod. “Donors have informed me that they would limit, alter, or eliminate their contributions to FEC if their names, addresses, and employers are publicly disclosed,” said Mussi.

Americans for Prosperity, a political advocacy group supporting ” limited government and free markets on the local, state, and federal levels,” filed a separate challenge to Proposition 211 in federal court on March 17. The case has not yet been assigned a hearing date.

State by state

Since July 12, state legislatures have not acted on any donor privacy and disclosure bills, a decrease from the nine bills acted on last month. We have tracked a total of 55 bills in 2023. In comparison, we tracked 76 bills at this point in 2022 and 40 bills at this point in 2021. 

Produced in association with Ballotpedia

Edited by Judy J. Rotich and Newsdesk Manager

“What’s the latest with Florida Man?”

Get news, handpicked just for you, in your box.

Check out our free email newsletters

Recommended from our partners