New Mexico has some of the weakest campaign finance disclosure laws in the United States, said the author of a new national study of how states can increase transparency in state and local elections said.

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizen's United decision, which prohibits limits on this kind of spending, states should tighten disclosure laws in anticipation of corporate and union money paying for attack ads from anonymous shell groups with "Orwellian" names, said Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, a lawyer with the New York-based Brennan Center for Justice.

New Mexico is one of only six states that doesn't require the reporting of campaign expenditures made by groups independent of a candidate's campaign organization, she said. "Your disclosure laws have not kept pace with the way modern campaigns are run," Torres-Spelliscy said in a telephone interview Tuesday. "It's not just candidates and political parties that spend money in a campaign. There's outside political groups that come in."

State Sen. Peter Wirth, D-Santa Fe, working with Common Cause New Mexico, has introduced a bill that would require more disclosure regarding who pays for independent campaign ads.

"In the post Citizens United World, we can't cap the amount of money people can spend on these ads. But we can require them to disclose who's spending money on the ads," Wirth said Tuesday.

Torres-Spelliscy's report, "Transparent Elections after Citizens United," stresses that federal court decisions — including Citizens United — still allow governments to require those making independent campaign expenditures to disclose the names of their contributors.

Wirth's Senate Bill 547 would cover any ad — radio, television or print — that mentions a candidate's name 30 days before a primary election or 60 days before a general election that costs more than $300 to produce and distribute. The ad wouldn't have to ask people to vote for or against a candidate.

Individuals and groups responsible for the ad would have to report the details of their independent expenditures to the Secretary of State's Office within three days of making the expenditure. The report would require details about anyone contributing more than $100 to the group.

Torres-Spelliscy said that a common tactic is for corporations to try to hide the real identities of contributors by forming groups with innocuous-sounding "Orwellian" names along the lines of "Citizens for Good Government" and "Americans for America."

Therefore, she said, the public remains ignorant of who really is paying for the ads.

Under Wirth's bill, the names of the people who paid for the ad would be required to appear on the ad itself.

A group whose primary purpose is to spend money for or against a candidate would be required to register with the Secretary of State's Office as an "independent expenditure committee." Such groups would have to appoint a treasurer, establish a separate bank account and file regular reports regarding contributions and spending.

Common Cause New Mexico's executive director Steve Allen said Wirth's is one of several bills dealing with the Campaign Reporting Act that have been introduced this session. He said his organization is backing Wirth's bill because it believes SB 547 could pass a constitutional challenge.

A Common Cause information sheet about SB 547 says the bill is "designed to push right up to the line of what's constitutionally permissible without stepping over the boundaries drawn by the federal courts."

Allen said that his group consulted with Torres-Spelliscy and others in helping draft Wirth's bill.

Torres-Spelliscy is the counsel for the Brennan Center's Democracy Program focusing on campaign finance reform and fair courts. The center, affiliated with New York University School of Law, is a nonpartisan public policy and law institute.

Contact Steve Terrell at 986-3037 or sterrell@sfnewmexican.com. Read his political blog at roundhouseroundup.com.