This is high season for election fundraising and spending, as political operatives prepare to focus public attention on the 2010 candidates, campaigns and issues.

But for all the political visibility sought by candidates, their money-raising will be more veiled than ever. A bill requiring disclosure of contributors’ names, even if enacted this year, won’t take effect before election day.

Nevertheless, we hope Sen. Susan Collins and Sen. Olympia Snowe will consider breaking ranks with Senate Republicans to allow a vote seeking openness in politics.

Partisans from all points on the political spectrum are finding new access to big money as a result of court decisions erasing restrictions on campaign contributions. The 5-4 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United this year struck down the ban on corporate and union contributions to candidates.

Although some donors are pleased to disclose their contributions, many groups and individuals can now wield their influence anonymously. This is not an issue of free speech; anyone seeking to influence elections and public policy owes the public some accountability. The Supreme Court decision took note that disclosure requirements do not violate the free speech rights of corporations and individuals.

The court’s Citizens United decision is the law of the land, but Congress is entitled to impose some accountability on corporate campaigning. Legislation currently on the table seeks to do just that by requiring corporations, labor unions, advocacy groups and trade associations to disclose the expenditures they are making to influence federal campaigns and the names of donors who are funding these expenditures.

Republican operatives Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie are coordinating the spending of corporations and individuals hoping to anonymously exert influence on public policy. This approach is now entirely legal, but it leaves voters in the dark about an important political dynamic.

Republicans in the Senate have so far prevented a vote on this bill, and we can see the practical reasons behind this strategy. But we believe most politicians, and particularly moderate Republicans, respect the importance of keeping voters well-informed. And they might also welcome such disclosure as insurance against a well-financed challenge coming out of right field.

— Questions? Comments? Contact Managing Editor Nick Cowenhoven at nickc@journaltribune.com.