SB 403 would prohibit a political committee, political party or conduit from accepting contributions that are made with a credit card online unless the contributor provides their credit card verification value (CVV) or code and the billing address associated with the card is located in the United States. Wisconsin State Capitol (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

Wisconsin lawmakers considered proposals to crack down on political contributions made with credit cards online and to provide additional information on constitutional amendment proposals to voters during a Senate Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs committee meeting Wednesday. The committee also took up a constitutional amendment proposal to forbid the government from shutting down places of worship during a state of emergency. 

New requirements for credit card political donations

Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee) said his bill creating new requirements for political donations made with a credit card online will  ensure there is a “good, secure” process in place in Wisconsin. 

“Let’s acknowledge that we need to know that unlawful sources and foreign entities are not infiltrating our campaigns and elections,” Tomczyk said, and that “citizens are funding candidates here in Wisconsin.”

The bill, SB 403, would prohibit a political committee, political party or conduit from accepting contributions that are made with a credit card online unless the contributor provides their credit card verification value (CVV) or code and the billing address associated with the card is located in the United States. 

If a U.S. citizen is living outside the country and wants to make a contribution from a credit card that doesn’t have a U.S. billing address, then the person would need to provide a mailing address used for voter registration. 

“I’m trying to make elections more secure, the donation process more secure,” Tomczyk said. 

The bill comes as Republicans and the Trump administration have targeted ActBlue — a Massachusetts-based platform that processes donations to Democratic campaigns — claiming that the platform facilitates so-called “smurfing,” a form of money laundering where large sums of money are broken down into smaller, less noticeable transactions and could allow for “straw donors” and foreign contributions. Stakeholders, including ActBlue and Democrats, have said that the action by the administration is an attack on the democratic process.

Wisconsin U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, in his position as chair of the U.S. House Committee on House Administration, launched an investigation into ActBlue asking whether it required CVV information from contributors in 2023. 

The company said at the time that while it did not, it has many other measures in place to confirm the permissibility of contributions and prevent fraudulent transactions including a requirement for passport information if a donor provides an address outside the U.S. 

Steil has since proposed federal legislation that would require credit card verification for online donations. 

Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) expressed concerns over how the bill could create barriers for individuals looking to contribute.

“Why are you trying to ban citizens from being able to donate by credit card?” Larson asked. 

“If they’re not voting in the United States, they’re allowed to donate by credit card if they’re providing all the information that the bill outlines. If they don’t have a voting address, it’s kind of odd,” Tomczyk replied. “I’m pretty sure it’d be a pretty small amount of people.”

The authors of the bill also said people could still donate by check and other methods if they didn’t have the necessary information. 

“It sounds like this is just putting up additional hurdles for people who want to donate by credit card and it just seems like, especially for smaller dollar donations, people who aren’t writing a lot of checks,” Larson said. “Most of the people that I know are giving with credit cards because they don’t use checks.”

Larson said the bill could make it harder for people to participate in democracy through political contributions. 

The authors of the bill claimed there have been examples of “smurfing” in Wisconsin, though they provided no specific examples when asked. 

“This is not something that comes up out of the blue. People have been interviewed about contributions that they gave with their credit card that they said they never gave,” Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville) said. 

“You guys sound like Gargamel as much as you’re talking about smurfing,” Larson said at one point, referring to the fictional antagonist in the Smurfs cartoon franchise. “Come up with an example. Give me some proof really if you want the governor to be able to sign it.”

“In testimony, I don’t think I have to show proof. I have to provide information and… get enough support to pass it through,” Tomczyk said. 

Providing information on constitutional amendments

Lawmakers are also proposing a way to ensure Wisconsin voters have information on the potential effects of constitutional amendments. 

SB 205 follows years of the Republican-led Legislature turning to constitutional amendment proposals as a way to make changes to law without going through Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. The most recent constitutional amendment that was approved by voters enshrined voter identification requirements in law, and other amendment proposals are circulating this session, including one to restrict the governor’s partial veto power. 

The committee heard from Tomczyk and Rep. Jerry O’Connor (R-Fond Du Lac) on their bill, which seeks to provide information about constitutional amendments to voters ahead of elections. 

“I’ve heard from countless friends and constituents, even people with college degrees and professional titles, all who tell me that every time they vote on a constitutional amendment the wording on the ballot makes no sense to them,” Tomczyk said. “The legalese, if you will, that is used on the ballot, is of course necessary and should be presented, but for regular everyday residents of Wisconsin, it might as well be in a different language. There has to be a way to explain what these amendments do so that people know what they are voting for.” 

“This is only meant to inform voters better about what they are voting for or against,” Tomczyk said. 

The bill would require a notice to go to voters that would include the date of the referendum, the text of the ballot question, the plain language summary of current law, an explanation in plain language of a proposed constitutional amendment and an explanation in plain language of the effects of a “yes” versus a “no” vote.

O’Connor said the Legislative Reference Bureau, the nonpartisan agency that drafts bills and proposals for the Legislature, would be responsible for writing the information in a black box. 

“The black box we cannot touch as legislators,” O’Connor said. He added that the legislation is “non-partisan, bipartisan and voter focused.” 

While the bill only has Republican cosponsors, it advanced through the Assembly Campaigns and Elections committee unanimously with support from two Democratic lawmakers. The bill is also supported by the League of Women Voters, the ACLU of Wisconsin, Disability Rights Wisconsin and the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. 

Places of worship constitutional amendment

The committee also took up Senate Joint Resolution 4, a constitutional amendment proposal that would prohibit the state from ordering the closure of places of worship during a state of emergency. 

This is the Legislature’s second consideration of the proposal, which was first introduced and passed by the Legislature during the 2023-25 session. 

The proposal was introduced in reaction to actions taken during the COVID-19 pandemic when Gov. Tony Evers’ administration declared a state of emergency. 

Evers’ initial “Safer at Home” order in March 2020 explicitly designated religious entities as essential, though it said any gatherings should include fewer than 10 people in a room or confined space at a time and that people needed to adhere to social distancing requirements as much as possible. It also advised and permitted places of worship to have drive-in services. 

Before the constitutional amendment proposal, Evers vetoed a bill in 2021 that would have prohibited local health officers from taking any action to close or forbid gatherings in places of worship to control outbreaks and epidemics of COVID-19. 

Tomczyk noted an incident at Pilgrim Lutheran Church in West Bend where a law enforcement officer showed up to shut down a service after a neighbor called in to report the gathering. According to a Wisconsin Public Radio report, the incident was a misunderstanding and the police department later apologized to the church.

“In America, in Wisconsin, law enforcement stopped the church service because the government decided that a virus was more important than the constitutional rights of Americans. That is unacceptable,” Tomczyk said. “Many people in our great state seek solace in times of difficulty within their church, synagogue, or other plates of worship. It is critical that we continue to protect every individual’s ability to gather and worship at the times when they rely on their faiths the most.” 

Larson asked Tomczyk whether he was open to holding a religious organization liable if people “get sick and die” because they decide to meet against the direction of a public health emergency.

“No,” Tomczyk replied. 

“So… if there is a deadly pandemic, people are dying… and their parishioners die, you are fine with those deaths?” Larson asked. 

“I’m supportive of people’s constitutional right to gather and to worship at the times that they choose and, and if they make that decision, God bless them,” Tomczyk said. 

According to the constitutional amendment draft, voters would be asked whether the state constitution should be “amended to prohibit the state or a political subdivision of the state from ordering the closure of, or forbidding gatherings in, places of worship in response to a state of emergency, including a public health emergency?”

The proposal received a hearing in the Assembly in May, but has not yet been voted on there. 

If the bill passes the Assembly and Senate this session, it would be placed in front of voters during the November elections in 2026 alongside a slate of other high-profile races, including the one for governor.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE