People United for Privacy Foundation (PUFPF) today announced the release of a new model policy, the Protect Donors at Home Act, to prevent political violence and safeguard civic engagement. The policy directs state agencies to redact campaign donors’ street names, street numbers, and employer information from public databases. Campaigns may still be required to provide this sensitive information to the appropriate state regulator, but it would no longer be made available to the public.

“Most Americans are not aware that making a $10 or $20 political donation can result in their home address being published online in a permanent, searchable database. At a time of rising political violence, these outdated laws create unnecessary risk for small donors by publicly disclosing detailed information about where they live and work,” said Heather Lauer, CEO of People United for Privacy Foundation.

“Political violence isn’t just a threat to public officials. It’s affecting ordinary Americans who participate in our democracy. Our laws should protect civic participation, not turn citizens into targets for harassment at their homes or workplaces,” said Alex Baiocco, PUFPF’s Director of Government Affairs. 

Political violence is an increasing concern for Americans at all levels of the political process. Many states have already moved to redact the home addresses of elected officials from public websites, following the assassination of Minnesota House speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband at their home. Yet campaign donors and citizen activists, like Charlie Kirk, also face legitimate safety concerns in the current environment. The Protect Donors at Home Act simply extends the same protections that are being embraced for elected officials to their constituents and supporters.

The widespread exposure of personal information on the internet enables extremists to identify and track down their victims. As a privacy expert recently demonstrated in The New York Times, campaign finance databases present “the largest trove of personal information” that can be found about an individual, including names, employers, and full home addresses. Indeed, the bipartisan Federal Election Commission (FEC) has unanimously recommended that Congress change the law to require redactions of contributors’ street addresses, citing safety concerns.

“[A]n ordinary person making a political contribution probably doesn’t think about whether their address might be used against them. Nor did the authors of the law that created this problem. FEC disclosure rules date to the 1970s – long before the existence of the internet as we know it. Back then, accessing donor information required physically visiting the FEC’s office and paging through paper files,” explained Democratic FEC Commissioner Dara Lindenbaum in The Washington Post.

As bad as the federal laws are, most state laws are even worse. While federal campaign finance laws disclose donors who give over $200 to any candidate – although this threshold disappears when giving through intermediary platforms like ActBlue or WinRed – state thresholds are typically far lower. In many states, giving as little as $20 results in a donor’s home address being exposed online. In some states, there is no threshold at all protecting small donors from exposure.

The Protect Donors at Home Act prohibits individual contributors’ street names and numbers, typically included in campaign finance reports, from being made publicly available in any manner, including disclosure in any state-operated campaign finance database. The Act also prohibits the inclusion of an individual campaign donor’s employer in publicly available campaign finance data. Finally, the policy ensures that government agencies are held liable for knowingly and intentionally violating the Act and permits any individual contributor whose street address and/or employer is publicly released to seek appropriate relief in the courts.

Importantly, the policy does not preclude the collection of donors’ street addresses and employers by the appropriate campaign finance enforcement agency, so long as such information is not made publicly available, including via public records requests. It also does not prohibit public disclosure of any other donor information required to be reported, such as a contributor’s name, city, state, zip code, and occupation.

These protections for donors’ privacy are popular and bipartisan. The most populous blue state (California) and red state (Texas) already require campaign contributors’ street addresses to be withheld from public reports. Wyoming does not collect this sensitive information from donors at all. PUFPF encourages all states to adopt similar protections via the Protect Donors at Home Act.

PUFPF’s other model legislation, the Personal Privacy Protection Act, has passed in 22 states containing over 100 million Americans since its debut in 2018. That policy prohibits state officials from making unlawful demands or disclosures relating to the personal information of members, volunteers, and donors to nonprofit organizations. PUFPF has also assisted states in updating their campaign finance laws to align with recent Supreme Court privacy decisions. Policymakers and concerned citizens who would like to learn more about the Protect Donors at Home Act should contact PUFPF on our website.

About People United for Privacy Foundation

People United for Privacy Foundation is the nation’s leading defender of an America where all people can freely and privately support ideas and nonprofits they believe in, so that all sides of a debate will be heard, individuals do not face retribution for supporting important causes, and all organizations have the ability to advance their missions because the privacy of their donors is protected.