With the issue of disclosure at the forefront of industry commentary, those who seek to limit the influence of third-party funding are ramping up pressure to have legislation enacted which would mandate disclosure of funding agreements. Following on from a recent study, which argued that third-party funding posed a risk to America’s national security, the Chamber of Commerce recently conducted public opinion research to take the pulse of voters on the issue.
An LFJ Conversation with Michael Kelley, Partner, Parker Poe
With the issue of disclosure at the forefront of industry commentary, those who seek to limit the influence of third-party funding are ramping up pressure to have legislation enacted which would mandate disclosure of funding agreements. Following on from a recent study, which argued that third-party funding posed a risk to America’s national security, the Chamber of Commerce recently conducted public opinion research to take the pulse of voters on the issue.
The Chamber’s Institute for Legal Reform released the results of a poll conducted on the day of the midterm elections, asking 800 voters whether they supported the idea of mandatory disclosure for third-party funding agreements. The poll found that a majority of voters, 69%, supported such a proposal, with broad support from voters across the political spectrum.
The poll also reported that an even greater majority of voters, 82%, opposed the idea of allowing foreign governments to invest in litigation targeting American companies. Whilst the Chamber’s position on litigation funding is well-established, industry leaders will need to bear in mind that a wide swathe of voters are in favour of greater disclosure, especially when framed as an issue of foreign interference in domestic legal proceedings involving American businesses.
