I expect many of you will disagree, but I don’t think Jim Black or
any politician should have to disclose or even voluntarily disclose the
donors to his legal defense fund.  The N & O argued
that Black should voluntarily provide the names of donors to his fund
and the amounts.   For those donors that want to remain
anonymous, according to the
N & O, Black should simply return their
money.  The paper also calls for legislation next year to address
this issue.

It is one thing when we are dealing directly with public
business, such as campaigns or the legislative process–reasonable
disclosures are needed.  Since this is Black’s personal legal
defense fund, even if it is being used to defend against alleged
government-related violations, it is still his personal legal defense fund.

Can
someone, including “special-interests” (a.k.a. a group of individuals
with shared interests coming together to influence policy when acting
alone they couldn’t make a difference) curry favor with a politician by
helping out with the fund?  Yes, they sure could–but that is
their right and not the public’s business.  The individual’s right
to defend himself/herself outweighs any interest that the public has in
this information.

The N & O argues:

“It may be
unlikely, but here’s a troubling possibility: An elected official could
move large sums of unregulated money from his defense fund into his
campaign treasury.”

If this happens, then appropriate action can
be taken at that time.  We shouldn’t pass laws that are overbroad
so we can protect against a few possible bad scenarios.