Some politically-active corporations are breathing a sigh of relief following last night’s defeat of California’s Proposition 32.  Although the media focused on the ballot initiative’s proposal to bar unions from using payroll deductions to collect PAC contributions, the initiative would have also had three equally far-reaching effects for corporations.  First, it would have prohibited corporations from using payroll deduction to collect PAC contributions if those PACs are active in California.  We previously noted this provision would have likely resulted in many federal PACs staying out of California state races entirely.  Second, Proposition 32 would have banned corporate contributions to candidates and their campaign committees.  For years, California has permitted direct corporate contributions to candidates.  Finally, the initiative would have established a state pay-to-play rule that would have prohibited the PACs of state contractors from contributing to certain state candidates.  Now that these proposed changes have been rejected by the voters, corporations can keep their focus on complying with the complexities of California’s existing campaign finance regime, rather than learning a new one.

Photo of Zachary G. Parks Zachary G. Parks

Zachary Parks advises corporations, trade associations, campaigns, and high-net worth individuals on their most important and challenging political law problems.

Chambers USA describes Zachary as “highly regarded by his clients in the political law arena,” noting that clients praised him as their “go-to outside…

Zachary Parks advises corporations, trade associations, campaigns, and high-net worth individuals on their most important and challenging political law problems.

Chambers USA describes Zachary as “highly regarded by his clients in the political law arena,” noting that clients praised him as their “go-to outside attorney for election law, campaign finance, pay-to-play and PAC issues.” Zachary is also a leading lawyer in the emerging corporate political disclosure field, regularly advising corporations on these issues.

Zachary’s expertise includes the Federal Election Campaign Act, the Lobbying Disclosure Act, the Ethics in Government Act, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, and the Securities and Exchange Commission’s pay-to-play rules. He has also helped clients comply with the election and political laws of all 50 states. Zachary also frequently leads political law due diligence for investment firms and corporations during mergers and acquisitions.

He routinely advises corporations and corporate executives on instituting political law compliance programs and conducts compliance training for senior corporate executives and lobbyists. He also has extensive experience conducting corporate internal investigations concerning campaign finance and lobbying law compliance and has defended his political law clients in investigations by the Federal Election Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, Congressional committees, and in litigation.

Zachary is also the founder and chair of the J. Reuben Clark Law Society’s Political and Election Law Section.

Zachary also has extensive complex litigation experience, having litigated major environmental claims, class actions, and multi-district proceedings for financial institutions, corporations, and public entities.

From 2005 to 2006, Zachary was a law clerk for Judge Thomas B. Griffith on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.