Is Idaho's biggest 2008 political race about to get a little greener?

The U.S. Supreme Court on June 26 struck down a little-known campaign finance rule, declaring it unconstitutional to limit how much money wealthy candidates may contribute to their own campaigns without affecting their opponents' war chests.

In Idaho, U.S. Senate Democrat candidate Larry LaRocco is pointing to the decision because, he says, his Republican opponent Jim Risch - who in the last filing cycle almost triggered the amendment - can now invest even more.

The "millionaire amendment" to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 - referred to as the McCain-Feingold Act - was enacted to create fairness and balance in campaigns, and to limit influence that candidates' own personal money had on races.

"We are running a smart, aggressive campaign and middle class, working Idahoans won't let Risch neglect the issues or buy this election," LaRocco said.

The rule stipulated that if candidates for the Senate gave more than a set amount to campaigns, their opponents subsequently can accept larger contributions from donors. Each state has a limit on candidates' individual donations, which is set by formula. In Idaho, that limit is $387,340.

In the most recent campaign period, Risch, Idaho's lieutenant governor, loaned his campaign $380,000 - short of triggering the amendment by $7,340. Had Risch broken the barrier, his primary opponents could have solicited much more than the standard limits placed per contributor. It also would have granted more spending authority to an opponent's political party committee.

The next filing date for the Senate race is July 15.

LaRocco has sent press releases out on the issue. Casting himself as a working-class hero, LaRocco continued his message that Risch is a rich attorney out-of-touch with average Idahoans. Risch has beaten LaRocco twice before, including a lieutenant governor's race in 2006.

"Risch was very aware of the millionaire's amendment," said LaRocco campaign manager Bob Stout. "I'm sure he was watching the Supreme Court ruling with a lot of interest."

Stout said the court decision benefits Risch more than LaRocco, a business consultant and former U.S. Congressman. He said they didn't plan on raising more money than Risch but make up for it in other ways. He said their quarterly amounts have increased with each filing.

Risch could not be reached for comment. But Jason Risch, his son and campaign spokesman, said he had not read the court decision.

"I haven't talked to him yet and I haven't read that case law yet, to determine how they struck it down, why they struck it down," Jason Risch said. "By simply saying 'the millionaire's amendment is struck down,' that's a pretty broad statement."

He said the loan in April was a simple campaign contribution and he had never discussed it with his father, and was therefore unable to talk about how the decision might affect the campaign.

"As far as how it affects our campaign, I haven't had any conversations with him about that."

Meanwhile, the court decision is likely moot in Idaho's race because Risch never actually triggered the amendment, said Gary Moncrief, a political science professor at Boise State University. As a result, the candidate always remains on level ground.

"If Risch can now give more to his own campaign, so can LaRocco and my understanding is they both have enough to make their own campaign contributions," he said. "The reality is Senate campaigns are usually able to generate money from individual donors anyway."

Jared S. Hopkins may be reached at 208-735-3204 or jhopkins@magicvalley.com