Unit II Election Process

 FEC – Federal Election Commission  BCRA – Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act  Buckley vs. Valeo  Citizens United vs. FEC  PACS  Political Action Committees  Groups formed to push soft money and influence campaign  527’s and 501’s  Groups created under specific tax codes that do not fall under FECA but engage in political activities and attempt to influence elections  A method to avoid regulation  Target by BCRA  Hard money = Federal money  Political donations raised from federally permissible sources within the limits established by BCRA  Donated directly to candidates to support campaign  Soft money = Nonfederal money  Political donations made in such a way as to avoid federal regulations.  Unregulated money donated to political parties, not candidates, that go towards party building activities,such as get out the vote campaigns, and “issue ads” or non-direct candidate ads

 Beginning of time—Civil War: No regulation  Civil War—1910  Gilded Age  Exceptionally scandalous politicians nationally  Boss Tweed  1868: 75% of money used in congressional elections through party assessments  1867: Naval Appropriations Bill  First federal effort to regulate campaign finance  Aimed at stopping the political shakedown naval yard workers for political contributions  Prohibits officers and employees of the fed. gov’t from soliciting contributions  1883: Civil Service Reform Act (Pendleton Act) prohibits the same solicitation of all federal workers

 Corrupt Practices Acts of 1911 and 1925  Set disclosure requirements for House and Senate Elections  Spending limits ($25k for Senate; $5k for House)  Ridiculously weak and regularly violated  1971 Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA)  1976: Buckley v. Valeo (1976)

 Buckley v. Valeo, (1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a federal law which set limits on campaign contributions, but ruled that spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech, and struck down portions of the law. The court also stated candidates can give unlimited amounts of money to their own campaigns.

Original Provision Effect of Buckley v. Valeo Expenditure limits Overall spending limits (Congress and president) Struck down partially (freedom of speech) Limits on the use of candidates’ own resources Struck down entirely (freedom of speech) Limits on media expenditures Struck down entirely (freedom of speech) Independent expenditure limits Struck down entirely (freedom of speech)

Original Provision Effect of Buckley v. Valeo Contribution limits Individual limits: $1k/candidate/election Affirmed PAC limits: $5k/candidate/election Affirmed Party committee limits: $5k/candidate/election Affirmed Cap on total contributions individual can make to all candidates ($25k) Struck down (freedom of speech) Cap on spending “on behalf of candidates” by parties Affirmed

 Purpose  In 1975, Congress created the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to administer and enforce the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA)  the statute that governs the financing of federal elections.  The duties of the FEC, which is an independent regulatory agency, are to  disclose campaign finance information  enforce the provisions of the law such as the limits and prohibitions on contributions,  oversee the public funding of Presidential elections.

 Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) 1975  Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) 2002  Major changes under BCRA

 The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, also known as "McCain-Feingold," after its sponsors, is the most recent major federal law on campaign finance, which revised some of the legal limits of expenditure set in 1974, and prohibited unregulated contributions (called "soft money") to national political parties. ‘Soft money’ also refers to funds spent by independent organizations that do not specifically advocate the election or defeat of candidates, and are not contributed directly to candidate campaigns.  Limits PACS  Prohibits contributions made from Corporate/Union treasury funds 60 days before an election

 Meant to close loopholes that allowed soft money to flow into campaign committees and to control advertising said to be aimed at issues but actually performing as campaign promotion  Challenged in McConnell vs FEC  BCRA was confirmed by the S.C.

Eliminated all soft money contributions to national party committees Increased individual limit from $1,000 to $2,000 with index for inflation ($2,300 in 2008) Banned the use of certain political communications by corporate, union or incorporated non-profit committees within 30 days of primary or convention, or 60 days of general (political communications) Millionaire’s amendment “Stand by your ad” (“I’m Bruce Lunsford and I endorsed this message”)

 In General  The financing of federal elections  Specifically  Disclosure of financial activity  Contributions  Receiving and Giving  Expenditures  Candidate support activities  Federal election activities  Soft Money more restricted:  PACS and Corporations/Unions

 Overrules MCConnell in part:  Overrules the ban on independent expenditures paid for by corporations or unions out of their treasuries 60 days before an election  Overturns ban on independent expenditures from corporate and union treasuries  "If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech," - Justice Kennedy

 It depends!  Candidate  Candidate specific activities  Contributions to other candidates, parties or causes  DNC/RNC  Federal candidates  Allocated nationally  State Party Committees  Federal, state & local candidates  Allocated statewide  PACs  Support candidates, parties that agree on specific issues  527s  Separate campaign