Guide to Modern Campaign Finance

Disclaimers

Public communications funded by political committees are required to feature a disclaimer indicating the name of the committee that funded the communication[1]. Outside groups and individuals funding a public communication are required to include a disclaimer if the communication is express advocacy.

A message funded by a candidate campaign committee must indicate which committee paid for the communication. (Example: “Paid for by the Smith for Congress Committee”)

A message authorized by a candidate (coordinated), but not funded by the candidate’s campaign committee, must acknowledge the candidate’s authorization and indicate who funded the message. (Example: “Paid for by the XYZ State Political Party and authorized by the Smith for Congress Committee”)

A message not authorized by a candidate (independent) must indicate which group funded the communication, provide the group’s address, telephone number or website address and acknowledge that no candidate authorized the communication. (Example: “Paid for by XYZ PAC (www.XYZ-PAC.com) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee”)

Disclaimers on print materials must be placed in a printed box and be clearly readable. It must appear on the front page of single sided documents and billboards. For formats no larger than 24 inches by 36 inches, size 12 type size is considered clearly readable.

Radio advertisements must contain the name of the political committee or person responsible for the communication. (Example: XYZ is responsible for the content of this advertising)

Television advertisements must contain “a "full-screen view of a representative of the political committee or other person making the statement," or a "voice-over" by the representative.”

[1] "Quick Answers-General Questions." Federal Election Commission. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. <http://www.fec.gov/ans/answers_general.shtml>.

Hard Money

Hard money is political money that is regulated by the FEC. Direct contributions to and from candidates, parties, and PACs are made with hard money. Contributors of hard money are disclosed to the FEC, which publishes the name, address, occupation, and employer for contributors who give over $200 to a particular political committee. The term is primarily used to differentiate from soft money.

Soft Money

Prior to BCRA, political party committees could accept unlimited contributions outside the purview of the FEC provided the funds were used for “party building activities”. These activities were defined to include things such as physical buildings, “Get Out the Vote” projects or voter registration efforts. Soft money could not be used to directly support federal candidates.

Soft money could come from individuals, corporations, unions, and organizations. Because soft money fell outside the purview there were no “contribution” limits on the amount or source[1].

Soft money was controversial because it can be incredibly difficult to distinguish between money used for supporting federal candidates and party building activity. A voter registration drive or buttons that say “Vote Democratic” could be funded with soft money in the district of a highly competitive congressional race, benefiting that district’s candidate without using express advocacy or scarce hard money.

Modern references to soft money may refer to Super PACs and 501(c)(4)s which can accept unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, and unions but cannot contribute directly to candidates.

[1] Corrado, Anthony. The New Campaign Finance Sourcebook. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2005. Print. P. 65

Independent Expenditure

An independent expenditure (IE) is made without coordination and authorization of a political candidate. The Supreme Court has ruled that because IEs are made without a candidate’s prior approval and cannot be requested by candidates, they do not pose a threat of corruption. This logic has led the Court and FEC to remove limits on contributions (both amount and source limits) to committees which only make independent expenditures. It also allows some organizations, such as corporations and unions, to make IEs when they previously had been prohibited.

Independent expenditures are express advocacy by definition. They explicitly call for the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate. Independent expenditures must disclose that they are not authorized by any candidate.

Express Advocacy

Express advocacy is political speech which “expressly advocates” for the election or defeat of a federal candidate. A footnote in the Buckley decision lists the following “magic words” which imply an advertisement is express advocacy: "vote for," "elect," "support", "cast your ballot for", "Smith for Congress", "vote against", "defeat", "reject", or any variations thereof.

Issue Advertisement

An issue advertisement is an advertisement which avoids explicitly calling for the election or defeat of a federal candidate[1]. A common strategy is for an issue ad to suggest viewers “call their representative” with a message about an issue. Issue ads were common because they could be funded with soft money (including money from corporate and union treasuries, which are prohibited from making direct contributions)[2].

BCRA sought to curb the influence of issue ads funded with soft money. The limits placed by BCRA were upheld by McConnell v. FEC but overturned later in Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC.

[1] "Campaign Finance Law Quick Reference for Reporters." Federal Election Commission. Web. 11 Dec. 2011. <http://www.fec.gov/press/bkgnd/bcra_overview.shtml>.

[2] Corrado, Anthony. The New Campaign Finance Sourcebook. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2005. Print. P. 65