Campaign Finance 101: A breakdown of money in US elections
Image: Portland Communications
Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, is planning to commit ~$45 million/month to a new super political-action committee (super PAC) backing former President Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, according to a new WSJ report.
Breaking down the logistics: Federal law strictly limits how much money each individual can contribute directly to a political campaign. Donations are currently capped at $3,300/candidate for the 2024 election cycle, while corporations and labor organizations are banned from direct campaign contributions entirely.
However, donors are able to sidestep this limit via the use of super PACs – a type of committee that arose from the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which found laws preventing people or corporations from independently spending on politics violate the First Amendment (money = speech).
- Super PACs can raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, associations, and/or individuals, then spend that money in favor – or against – any political candidates, so long as they don’t donate directly to a candidate’s campaign.
- In the past, super PACs were also prohibited from coordinating their spending with the campaigns they benefit. But under a new federal rule issued in March, campaigns are now allowed to work directly with allied super PACs that conduct door-to-door voter canvassing (a group that includes the super PAC Elon Musk is reportedly supporting).
Big picture: The top three presidential candidates this election cycle – President Biden, former President Trump, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – have raised a combined $900+ million in campaign funding to date, with roughly half of that figure coming from super PACs, according to data from nonpartisan research group Open Secrets.
- In terms of overall federal election spending this election cycle, the 2,223 groups officially registered as super PACs have doled out a collective $514+ million of the $1.9+ billion they’ve raised so far.
📊 Flash poll: Which of the following best describes your viewpoint regarding campaign financing for US federal elections?
See a 360° view of what media pundits are saying →
Sprinkles from the Left
- Some commentators argue that while reformers had hoped that utilizing small donors could help counter the money that wealthy individuals funnel to candidates, the reality is that small-dollar have made politics worse, not better, by funding more extreme candidates.
- Others contend that corporations who devote money towards electing candidates they hope will do their industry’s bidding or support a specific cause are supporting a bad business model, since corporate political spending doesn’t reflect the diverse preferences and views of company stakeholders.
- “Small-dollar donors didn’t save democracy. They made it worse.” –David Byler, WaPo
- “Corporate Political Spending Is Bad Business” –Dorothy S. Lund and Leo E. Strine, Jr., Harvard Business Review
- “For $200, a Person Can Fuel the Decline of Our Major Parties” –Thomas B. Edsall, NY Times
Sprinkles from the Right
- Some commentators argue that anyone who really wants to get money out of politics should advocate smaller government, since with less at stake, there will be less incentive for citizens or corporations to try to influence the outcome.
- Others contend that it’s important to follow the money in politics and track which lawmakers receive donations from which corporations and PACs, but it’s wrong to accuse politicians of hypocrisy for accepting that money and working against their donors.
- “At Last, Campaign Finance Reform” –James Freeman, WSJ
- “It’s not ‘hypocrisy’ for senators to attack the companies that fund their campaigns” –Timothy P. Carney, Washington Examiner
- “Political Giving Should Be Private” –Bradley A. Smith, WSJ
Share this!
Recent Discussion stories
Discussion
| July 15, 2024Trump survived an assassination attempt
On Saturday, at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, former President Donald Trump was the target of what the FBI described as an assassination attempt.
Discussion
| July 12, 2024A bipartisan Senate group seeks to ban stock trading in Congress
📝 This week, a bipartisan group of senators introduced a bill that would ban members of Congress and their immediate family from trading stocks, in an effort to prevent profiting from insider knowledge.
Discussion
| July 10, 2024The Republican Party unveiled its 2024 platform
🗳️ Republicans published a new party platform for the 2024 election season, laying out their vision for the next 4 years should former President Trump win in November.
You've made it this far...
Let's make our relationship official, no 💍 or elaborate proposal required. Learn and stay entertained, for free.👇
All of our news is 100% free and you can unsubscribe anytime; the quiz takes ~10 seconds to complete