Republican complaints about secret, foreign money flowing to Barack Obama's presidential campaign have all the makings of an October surprise.

Prompted by a story posted on the conservative blog Newsmax.com, the Republican National Committee has asked the Federal Election Commission to audit Obama's campaign fund, alleging in part that the Democrat has collected illegal foreign money in the form of unreported, small donors. The Newsmax story was buttressed by another post on the American Spectator's Web site claiming that an anonymous FEC "analyst" was agitating -- without success -- for a full criminal investigation.

It's the kind of irresistible fodder that scandal-hungry political reporters love -- but they're not likely to turn up much this time around.

The Obama campaign has elaborate controls to prevent noncitizens from donating to the campaign. Americans living abroad may not contribute without giving a passport number, and may not even buy campaign merchandise. (Such purchases are counted as contributions.) Donors must also bring an American passport to Obama fundraising events overseas. Obama spokesman Bill Burton shot back that GOP nominee John McCain, too, has been subject to complaints about foreign money. "We look forward to a thorough investigation into whether John McCain's campaign has returned all of the money it raised from foreign nationals," Burton said.

Still, the persistence of blog-driven rumors about Obama's supposed secret, foreign donors points up the practical and political questions raised by his unprecedented small-donor fundraising.

As the Internet continues to drive low-dollar fund raising, some argue that disclosure laws need to keep pace.

Under federal election law, only contributions totaling $200 or more must be reported to the FEC. Since about half [PDF] of Obama's staggering $456 million in receipts comes from donors who dole out less than $200, there is, in fact, some $222 million in donations that his campaign does not (and need not) report.

"We have called on both candidates to say something more about their small donors, if only to put aside these unfounded concerns that foreigners or other donors who can't give, are contributing," said Massie Ritsch, communications director for the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

In June, CRP joined with seven watchdog and political money organizations in a letter asking both Obama and McCain to disclose more details about their record receipts. The letter's principal request was that the candidates identify the so-called "bundlers" who round up hundreds of thousands in private donations for the campaigns.

But the organizations also asked the candidates to share more about their smaller donors. Obama's small donors are of particular interest, noted Ritsch, since the Democrat justified his decision to opt out of the public financing system partly on the grounds that his record 2.5 million donors have created a "parallel" public financing system.

"If it is parallel, then the contributions should be somewhat evenly distributed around the country, not just in areas that are hot spots for Obama," Ritsch noted. He added that his organization has been fielding inquiries for some months from skeptics who question whether Obama could really have raised such a staggering sum from low-dollar donors.

"We are sensing some question among the public that the candidates, particularly Obama, could have legally raised all this money," said Ritsch. "And the big mystery about it was the small money, which added up to very, very big money."

In response to the June letter, both the McCain and Obama campaigns have started posting lists of bundlers on their Web sites. McCain also now lists all donors, including those who give less than $200. McCain's small donors account for about 31 percent of the $216 million that he netted during the primary. Obama, however, has yet to list his low-dollar donors.

"We go above and beyond the level of required disclosure," said Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt, citing the campaign's bundler listings. He added: "We constantly review our procedures to make sure that the ways in which we raise money strictly follow FEC standards, and any time there is an opportunity to tighten those procedures... we take advantage of it."

Some reports have targeted McCain, too, as receiving the odd foreign contribution, sparking a complaint [PDF] from the aggressive watchdog group Judicial Watch. But claims that foreign money is flooding campaigns are far-fetched at best, most campaign finance experts agree. Ever since the Asian money scandal entangled President Clinton in the 1990s, candidates have regarded anything remotely linked to foreign money as radioactive.

"The campaigns take the foreign national provision very seriously, precisely because it is something that has been an issue in the past," said former FEC general counsel Lawrence M. Noble, who practices political law at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

Noble added that FEC analysts routinely go over campaign finance reports looking for red flags, and that more information is not always better. Election law traditionally has singled out large donors because of their potential influence; and the big money can get swamped if public reports include every last dollar.

As the Internet continues to drive low-dollar fund raising, however, some argue that disclosure laws need to keep pace. As Ritsch put it: "It does both the public and the candidates a service if they tell more about this large chunk of their money."