Civil Actions - Punitive Damage Awards - Surcharge
HB 906, titled the Stop Scam PACs Act, adds a new disclosure section to Maryland election law governing certain political organizations and solicitation materials. The bill requires covered persons and political action committees that make independent expenditures or electioneering communications to include clear and conspicuous disclaimers in solicitations when they use a candidate’s name, image, or likeness without authorization, and to state when contributions are not necessarily used for charitable purposes and are not tax-deductible. It defines key terms such as solicitation, donation, and disbursement for purposes of the new requirements.
The bill also gives the State Administrator of Elections authority to investigate potential violations, notify the subject of an investigation, hold a public hearing before the State Board, and issue subpoenas for witnesses or records. After an investigation, the State Board may publish its findings, bar a violator from soliciting contributions or donations for a period of time, or impose a civil penalty of up to $10,000. The bill specifies that violations are not subject to the criminal penalties, civil penalties, or State Prosecutor investigation provisions that otherwise apply under election law, and it authorizes the State Board to adopt implementing regulations. The act takes effect July 1, 2025.
HB 906 amends Maryland Election Law by creating new disclosure and enforcement requirements for certain political organizations and PACs engaged in fundraising tied to candidates, political parties, charitable-seeming appeals, independent expenditures, electioneering communications, or political disbursements. It expands the State Board of Elections’ oversight role by authorizing investigations, subpoenas, public findings, solicitation bans, and civil penalties, while carving these violations out of other existing penalty and State Prosecutor enforcement provisions. Affected parties include non-corporate, non-labor PACs and other filers under the cited campaign finance reporting sections.
The bill appears generally favorable and aimed at consumer and donor protection, as reflected by its committee report, adoption in the House, and lack of recorded opposition in the provided materials. The framing as the “Stop Scam PACs Act” suggests a policy concern about deceptive fundraising practices, and the bill’s disclosure-focused approach indicates support for transparency in political solicitations. No vote breakdown or transcript is provided, so the available record shows broad procedural support rather than detailed debate.
The main potential points of contention are the scope of the new disclaimer requirements and the State Board’s enforcement powers. Covered organizations may object to being required to disclose that candidate names or likenesses are used without permission, or to state that donations are not necessarily charitable and are not tax-deductible, especially in fundraising contexts that resemble issue advocacy or political messaging. Another likely issue is the administrative authority granted to the State Administrator and State Board, including subpoena power, public reporting, solicitation bans, and civil penalties up to $10,000, which could raise concerns about regulatory burden and enforcement discretion.