Campaign finance in the United States

476:

acquire immediate access and favor—suggesting they at least anticipate that the donations will influence policy." Research published in 2020 by University of Chicago political scientist Anthony Fowler and Northwestern University political scientists Haritz Garro and Jörg L. Spenkuch found no evidence that corporations that donated to a candidate received any monetary benefits from the candidate winning election. However, another study found that increasing lobbying reduces a corporation's effective tax rate, with an increase of 1% in lobbying expenditures expected to reduce a corporation's next-year tax rate between 0.5 and 1.6%. Another study based on data from 48 different states found that every $ 1 "invested" in corporate campaign contribution is worth $ 6.65 in lower state corporate taxes.

2096:, gives each candidate who chooses to participate a fixed amount of money. To qualify for this subsidy, the candidates must collect a specified number of signatures and small (usually $ 5) contributions. The candidates are not allowed to accept outside donations or to use their own personal money if they receive this public funding. Candidates who choose to raise money privately rather than accept the government subsidy are subject to significant administrative burdens and legal restrictions, with the result that most candidates accept the subsidy. This procedure has been in place in races for all statewide and legislative offices in 2417:

2020, fell to 4% of all spending (from 9% in the last presidential election cycle), but 'outside spending' (i.e. political expenditures made by groups or individuals supposedly independently of, and not coordinated with, candidates' committees, which includes super PACs and 501(c) 'dark money' organizations), came to almost $ 3.3 billion, nearly doubling the 2016 number. Small contributions rose (from 15.2% to 22.9%) but were still less in total than large individual donations (42.59%). The percentage of really large donations to political committees, i.e. from the top 100 donors, came to $ 1.6 billion in 2020.

1643:"—to political parties for activities intended to influence state or local elections. In a series of advisory opinions between 1977 and 1995, the FEC ruled that political parties could fund "mixed-purpose" activities—including get-out-the-vote drives and generic party advertising—in part with soft money, and that parties could also use soft money to defray the costs of "legislative advocacy media advertisements," even if the ads mentioned the name of a federal candidate, so long as they did not expressly advocate the candidate's election or defeat. Furthermore, in 1996, the Supreme Court decided 1261:. Provided the expenditure is not coordinated with the other candidate, this type of spending is not limited. Under the FEC rules, leadership PACs are non-connected PACs, and can accept donations from individuals and other PACs. Since current officeholders have an easier time attracting contributions, leadership PACs are a way dominant parties can capture seats from other parties. A leadership PAC sponsored by an elected official cannot use funds to support that official's own campaign. However, it may fund travel, administrative expenses, consultants, polling, and other non-campaign expenses. 2050:

increases in the cost of living. In 2012, the parties' general election nominees were eligible to receive $ 91.2 million in public funds, although neither the Democratic or Republican campaigns chose to accept those funds. If general election candidates accept public funds, they agree not to raise or spend private funds or to spend more than $ 50,000 of their personal resources. Hence, general election candidates who have the ability to raise more than the amount of public funds offered may decline the offer of public funds in favor of privately raising and spending a larger sum of money.

3934: 711:, maintain legal restrictions on money in politics are an unjust restriction on free speech that should be opposed as a matter of principle. Bopp writes that "there may be too little money spent during political campaigns, not too much", because government is larger and more powerful than it should be, and at least often agree that campaign finance reform limiting spending on political campaigns is an unconstitutionally limit on "citizens' freedom of speech and association". DeVos compares restrictions on campaign finance to the tyranny of 2131:

signed it, but the law did not take effect unless approved by voters in a referendum in 2010. In June 2010, voters soundly rejected the measure, 57% to 43%. A proposal to implement Clean Elections in Alaska was voted down by a two-to-one margin in 2008, and a pilot program in New Jersey was terminated in 2008 amid concern about its constitutionality and that the law was ineffective in accomplishing its goals. In 2010, Portland voters used a referendum to repeal the clean elections law, originally enacted by the city council. In 2006, in

1380:

provide the names, occupations, employers and addresses of all individuals who give them more than $ 200 in an election cycle. Additionally, they must disclose expenditures to any individual or vendor. The Federal Election Commission maintains this database and publishes the information about campaigns and donors on its website. (Similar reporting requirements exist in many states for state and local candidates and for PACs and party committees.) There are extensive loopholes in campaign finance disclosure rules.

1162:

are 'in the pocket' of so-called moneyed interests", since "with the advent of the Internet, prompt disclosure of expenditures" would be easier than ever (quoting Justice Anthony Kennedy). This has been criticized as "naive". Critics have noted that independent expenditure can be and have been closely coordinated with political campaigns, and that soft money began "flooding into elections" via "social welfare" groups that "claimed the right to spend on elections without disclosing their donors."

1773:, the Court also interpreted the "electioneering communications" provisions of BCRA to exempt "nonprofit corporations that were formed for the sole purpose of promoting political ideas, did not engage in business activities, and did not accept contributions from for-profit corporations or labor unions." Thus, non-business, non-profit political organizations could run electioneering advertisements provided that they did not accept corporate or union donations. 790:(IRS) filings. These donors exploit the SuperPAC loophole, which bypasses the traditional donation maximum for an individual in any year. On the Republican side, just around 130 particularly rich families accounted for more than half of the publicly disclosed presidential candidate campaign financing. For several major Republican presidential candidates, a handful of donors and their businesses accounted for most of the donations to the candidate. 40: 1780:" (named for the section of the tax code under which they operate). These nonprofit organizations are not regulated by the FEC, provided that they do not coordinate with candidates or expressly advocate for the election or defeat of a specific candidate. After the passage of the BCRA, many of the soft money-funded activities previously undertaken by political parties were taken over by various 527 groups, which funded many issue ads in the 1291:

In 10 states independent spending amounted to 19% of the total amount of money contributed to candidates between 2005 and 2010. In three of those states independent spending was greater than 25% of the contributions given to candidates. Critics (such as journalist Matea Gold, Representative David E. Price) have complained that Super PACs have found "creative ways to work in concert" with the candidates and FEC regulation of them is nominal.

1647:, in which the Court ruled that Congress could not restrict the total amount of "independent expenditures" made by a political party without coordination with a candidate, invalidating a FECA provision that restricted how much a political party could spend in connection with a particular candidate. As a result of these rulings, soft money effectively enabled parties and candidates to circumvent FECA's limitations on federal election 611:

no on particular legislation. She found that political money "carries more weight" in states with "more highly compensated legislators, larger chambers, and more professionalized leadership structures", where the "majority party's advantage is tightly contested and whose legislators are more likely to hold hopes of running for higher office"; less weight where legislatures have term limits and voters are more highly educated.

774: 687:

fundraised prominently for their “independent” groups and even appeared in their ads. In addition, "a new breed of tax-exempt nonprofits has proliferated, boosting politicians — and their policies — while in office." They "raise unlimited, undisclosed funds". Brennan suggests "no more appearances by candidates at 'independent' fundraisers", and "a cooling off period before advisers jump to super PAC staff, and so on".

1272:

of their funding cannot be traced back to the original donor. In the 2019-2020 election cycle, there were 2,415 groups organized as super PACs; their receipts reportedly totaled a little over $ 2.5 billion and independent expenditures totaled of a little under $ 1.3 billion. "Super PACs" first arose in the 2010 election. Super PACs were made possible by two judicial decisions. First, in January 2010 the

650:," as players in the private sector spend time and money "trying to get a bigger piece of the economic pie for themselves" (in the form of tax cuts, subsidies, cuts in regulation and other special favors that the elected officials they donate to can provide), instead of focusing on enlarging the pie itself (with "productive economic activity" such as new inventions and better, cheaper goods and services). 421: 2458:

In the 2016 election cycle individual donations to candidates made up 52 percent of funds raised by House candidates compared to the 32 percent that PACS raised (Side et al 2018). This goes directly against the media narrative that PACS hold the power when it comes to election cycle spending. In the 2018 election cycle, leadership PACs donated more than $ 67 million to federal candidates.

1177:, commonly known as "super PACs," which are allowed to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to advocate for or against any candidate(s) or issues, as long as there is no coordination, consultation or request by any campaign or candidate. Such donations in presidential elections amount to hundreds of millions of dollars. There are three main legal categories of independent groups: 1548:. The new regulations included limits on campaign finance, including caps on (1) individual contributions to candidates, (2) contributions to candidates by "political committees" (commonly known as Political Action Committees, or PACs), (3) total campaign expenditures, and (4) independent expenditures by individuals and groups "relative to a clearly identified candidate." 723:

up with politics in general and money is actually "just a convenient bugaboo". Furthermore, many things the public believes about corruption in politics are not true. Experts on campaign finance are much less cynical than the public about the nefarious influence of money in politics. "Legal scholars and social scientists say the evidence is meager, at best, that the post-

1399:," so named because while the recipient knows the identity of those giving them money, the public knows neither the identity of the campaigns, candidates nor other entities receiving the money, nor the amounts raised and spent, as these are exempt from disclosure requirements. In the 2020 election, more than $ 1 billion in “dark money” was spent at the federal level: 1319:

disclose their donors publicly.. This aspect of the law has led to extensive use of 501(c)(4) organizations in raising and donating money for political activity. The NAACP, Planned Parenthood, Sierra Club, and National Rifle Association are well known examples of organizations that operate 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations that engage in political advocacy.

1245:

shareholders in the case of a corporation and members in the case of a union or other interest group. In exchange, the sponsor of the PAC may absorb all the administrative costs of operating the PAC and soliciting contributions. As of January 2009, there were 1,598 registered corporate PACs, 272 related to labor unions and 995 to trade organizations.

6173: 694:, "10 times more often than a decade ago. In 2016, the agency levied less than $ 600,000 in penalties, a 90 percent drop over the same time." Brennan suggests adding another (non-partisan) commissioner to end the evenly balanced bipartisan structure, and giving the commission a chief administrative officer for a fixed term of four to six years, etc. 1251:: A nonconnected PAC is financially independent, meaning that it must pay for its own administrative expenses using the contributions it raises. Although an organization may financially support a nonconnected PAC, these expenditures are considered contributions to the PAC and are subject to the dollar limits and other requirements of the Act. 1387:, aggregate data on political contributions to provide insight into the influence of various groups. In August 2014, a new smartphone app called "Buypartisan" was released to allow consumers to scan the barcodes of items in grocery stores and see where that corporation and its leaders directed their political contributions. 1158:

are no limits on soft money and some examples are donations for stickers, posters, and television and radio spots supporting a particular party platform or idea but not a concrete candidate. Soft money contributions may be spent on registering and mobilizing voters, just not on expressed advocacy for a particular candidate.

1821:, the Supreme Court stated that the restrictions on "electioneering communications" applied only to advertisements that "can only reasonably be viewed as advocating or opposing a candidate." Thus, if there was any reasonable way to view an advertisement as an "issue ad," it would be exempt from the BCRA's restrictions. 2457:

Money that has been funneled into PACS has been on the rise. Congressional PACS went from raising 131 million dollars in 1978 to 466 million dollars in 2018 (Sides et al 2018). Even though people think that the majority of spending during a political campaign comes from PACS the data shows otherwise.

2429:

In the 2010 midterm election cycle, candidates for office, political parties, and independent groups spent a total of $ 3.6 billion on federal elections. The average winner of a seat in the House of Representatives spent $ 1.4 million on their campaign. The average winner of a Senate seat spent $ 9.8

1593:

also held that the disclosure and reporting requirements of FECA could only apply to expenditures authorized or requested by a candidate or expenditures for communications that "expressly advocate the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate." In conclusion, the arguments presented by the

1271:

only committees", because they may not make contributions to candidate campaigns or parties, but rather must do any political spending independently of the campaigns. While super PACs are legally required to disclose their donors, some of these groups are effectively dark money outlets when the bulk

1161:

The reasoning behind the court decisions was that independent/soft spending would not result in corruption since the candidate would not be indebted to the independent contributor, and that those independent expenditures would "be visible to the public" who would then know "whether elected officials

793:

A 2017 study found that "only a small portion of Americans make campaign donations" and that both Democratic and Republican donors "are more ideologically extreme than other partisans, including primary voters. With respect to why individuals contribute, we show that donors appear responsive to their

686:

Close fundraising loopholes for candidates and officeholders. Super PACs, can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money in support of candidates, but are supposed to be “independent” of those candidates. In fact "many super PACs were run by candidates’ top aides" or close associates". "Politicians

150:

Races for non-federal offices are governed by state and local law. Over half the states allow some level of corporate and union contributions. As of 2021, some states have stricter limits on contributions, while some states have no limits at all. Much information from campaign spending comes from the

1419:

Money donated by trade association groups and not-for-profit corporations, which are allowed to raise unlimited amounts from corporations and individuals, and to spend unlimited amounts any way they wish. The amount of dark money raised and spent has been increasing very rapidly each election cycle

1244:

from making direct contributions or expenditures in connection with federal elections. These organizations may, however, sponsor a "separate segregated fund" (SSF), known as a "connected PAC". These PACs may receive and raise money only from a "restricted class", generally consisting of managers and

785:

and other super wealthy people comprises a disproportionate share of campaign financing in the United States. Examining one slice of the campaigning season—Summer 2015 of the 2016 presidential campaign cycle—the donations of fewer than 400 super wealthy families comprised nearly half of all publicly

722:

On a more practical level, Contrarians (David Primo and Jeffrey Milyo) argue that the public has been deceived by "the incessant message" propagated by 'the media, politicians, reform groups, and scholars", that money in politics is bad. In fact this public disapproval comes from Americans being fed

682:

Fully Disclose All Political Spending. As of 2018, disclosure laws "fail to regulate political advertising on the internet create the potential for a massive increase in undisclosed online spending". In state and local elections, where there is much less political money, "a dark money expenditure as

642:

gives powerful corporations and wealthy individuals leverage to not just express their political views or support for a candidate, but to "reshape the American economy in their favor", favoring lower taxes and smaller government over public spending to improve policing, public schools, environmental

610:

A 2012 study by Lynda Powell examined "subtle and not-so-subtle ways in which money buys influence" in state legislatures. They varied "from setting a party's agenda, to keeping bills off the floor, to adding earmarks and crafting key language in legislation", but did not often include voting yes or

470:

found that politicians made themselves more available for meetings with individuals when they believed that the individuals had donated to their campaign. A 2011 study found that "even after controlling for past contracts and other factors, companies that contributed more money to federal candidates

2416:

In 2020, $ 14.4 billion was spent on federal election campaigns — $ 5.7 billion for the presidential election and $ 8.7 billion for congressional races—according to Open Secrets.org. Democrats outspent Republicans in races for both branches of government. The percentage of fundraising from PACs in

1611:

or phrases in footnote 52 of that opinion — "vote for," "elect," "support", "cast your ballot for", "____ for Congress", "vote against", "defeat", "reject", or any variations thereof — as illustrative of speech that qualified as "express advocacy". The definition of express advocacy is what created

1370:

Political party committees may contribute funds directly to candidates, subject to the contribution limits listed above. National and state party committees may make additional "coordinated expenditures," subject to limits, to help their nominees in general elections. National party committees may

1318:

501(c)(4) "social welfare", 501(c)(5) "labor unions", 501(c)(6) "chambers of commerce" unlike 501(c)(3) charitable organizations can participate in political campaigns and elections, as long as the organization's "primary purpose" is issue advocacy and not political advocacy and are not required to

1290:

held that contributions to groups that only make independent expenditures could not be limited in the size and source of contributions to the group. Independent expenditures continue to grow with $ 17 million spent in 2002 on congressional elections, $ 52 million in 2006, and $ 290 million in 2010.

806:

researchers who found that 82% of U.S. billionaires made financial contributions to political parties or candidates and a third of them "bundled" contributions from others, hosted political fundraisers, or both, focusing primarily on issues of taxes or Social Security, "overwhelmingly, for example,

801:

A 2022 study found that billionaires are increasingly using their personal wealth and that of corporations they control to, "drown out regular voters' voices and elect hand-picked candidates who further rig the nation's economy — especially the tax system." These findings comport with a 2015 report

601:

This may be because donors give to candidates who are "already viewed as being much stronger" than their opponent to ingratiate themselves with what looks like the winner, but also because money going to a less well-known candidate has the intended effect and results in their winning. "Even in wave

484:

At least according to one academic, (Geoffrey Cowan, Annenberg family chair for communication leadership at USC), campaign spending does not correlate with electoral victory. "You have to have enough, but it doesn't have to be the most." It has been suggested that Donald Trump's victory over well

311:

An estimated $ 16.7 billion was spent on the 2021 and 2022 election cycle, exceeding that of the last mid-term election. According to Open Secrets, of the 25 top donors for the 2021-2022 cycle, 18 are Republican, who have outspent Democrats by $ 200 million, and much of the Democrat's money was not

2083:

on individual tax returns (the check off does not increase the filer's taxes, but merely directs $ 3 of the government's general fund to the presidential fund). The number of taxpayers who use the check off has fallen steadily since the early 1980s, until by 2006 fewer than 8 percent of taxpayers

1885:

to hold that Congress could not limit donations to organizations that only made independent expenditures, that is, expenditures that were "uncoordinated" with a candidate's campaign. These decisions led to the rise of "independent-expenditure only" PACs, commonly known as "Super PACs." Super PACs,

1606:

It also showed the limited reach of campaign finance laws to candidate and party committees, and other committees with a major purpose of electing candidates, or to speech that "expressly advocated" election or defeat of candidates. In an effort to distinguish between funding that could be limited

1379:

Campaign finance law at the federal level requires candidate committees, party committees, and PACs to file periodic reports disclosing the money they raise and spend. Federal candidate committees must identify, for example, all PACs and party committees that give them contributions, and they must

1204:

Organizations other than individual candidates and their campaigns also contribute to election spending. These organizations can donate money to political campaigns (according to the limits described above), but in addition they can spend money directly to influence elections in what are known as

1165:

The key factor is whether an ad uses words like or similar to "vote for" or not. Most of such donations received by state party committees are then sent to the national party headquarters to spend as they please, including on political campaigns by candidates. Critics call this a legalized form of

1157:

or "independent spending". Following a couple of 2010 court decisions (Citizens United v. FEC and SpeechNOW.org v. FEC, see below), soft money political spending was exempt from federal limits, creating what some have called "a major loophole" in federal campaign financing and spending law. There

797:

Another 2017 study found that relatively unpopular industries (which depending on the political situation may include fossil fuels, banking, etc.) provide larger contributions to candidates. The authors of the study argue that this is because candidates lose voter support when they are associated

2130:

in November 2006, sponsored by the California Nurses Union, that would have provided for public financing of political campaigns and strict contribution limits on corporations, was defeated. In 2008, the non-partisan California Fair Elections Act passed the legislature and Governor Schwarzenegger

1099:

One consequence of the limitation upon personal contributions from any one individual is that campaigns seek out "bundlers"—people who can gather contributions from many individuals in an organization or community and present the sum to the campaign. Campaigns often recognize these bundlers with

107:

have more political influence than other people", but that 72% thought this was "not at all" or "not too" much the case. Another 65% of respondents agreed that it should not be impossible to change this and that "new laws could be written that would be effective in reducing the role of money in

1620:

In the 1970s, the FEC ran random audits into the campaign finances of House representatives. The audits revealed that nearly half of House members had campaign finance violations. Audited House members were more likely to retire. Among those that did not retire, their re-election races were more

1361:

for the election or defeat of a candidate or party. When operated within the law, there are no upper limits on contributions to 527s and no restrictions on who may contribute. There are no spending limits imposed on these organizations. However, they must register with the IRS, publicly disclose

1048:

The limits in this column apply to a national party committee's accounts for: (i) the presidential nominating convention; (ii) election recounts and contests and other legal proceedings; and (iii) national party headquarters buildings. A party's national committee, Senate campaign committee and

166:

Soft Money: money that is not supposed to "advocate the election or defeat of a federal candidate", but instead to be used for "state and local elections and generic 'party-building' activities, including voter registration campaigns and get-out-the-vote drives". Unlike hard money, there are "no

2071:

Eligibility of minor parties for public funds is based on showing in the previous election, with 5% of the popular vote needed to qualify. The only party other than the Republicans and Democrats to receive government funding in a general election was the Reform Party, which qualified for public

1947:

To receive subsidies in the primary, candidates must qualify by privately raising $ 5000 each in at least 20 states. During the primaries, in exchange for agreeing to limit their spending according to a statutory formula, eligible candidates receive matching payments for the first $ 250 of each

1441:

According to Bryant and McManus, the "first federal campaign finance law" came after the Civil War—the Navy Appropriations Bill of 1867, which prohibited government employees from soliciting contributions from Navy yard workers. Wealthy and notable families such as the Astors and Vanderbilts

475:

found that industries overseen by committees decreased their contributions to congresspeople who recently departed from the committees and that they immediately increase their contributions to new members of the committees, which is "evidence that corporations and business PACs use donations to

1191:

These groups are more active in American politics than ever before, as in 2016, more than $ 2.3 billion was raised between the Democratic and Republican National Committees. For the amounts of soft money contributed in recent years and the legislation that enabled this, see the section on the

2049:

In addition to primary matching funds, the public funding program also assists with funding the major party (and eligible minor party) nominees' general election campaigns. The grants for the major parties' general election nominees are adjusted each Presidential election year to account for

1943:

At the federal level, public funding is limited to subsidies for presidential campaigns. This includes (1) a matching program for the first $ 250 of each individual contribution during the primary campaign and (2) funding the major party nominees' general election campaigns. Through the 2012

1090:

Election campaigns for non-federal offices are governed by state and local law, and contributions for these campaigns are not found in the federal campaign database. As of 2021, over half the states allow some level of corporate and union contributions, often the same as those for individual

1755:

from soliciting or spending any soft money and prohibited state and local party committees from using soft money for activities that affect federal elections. Second, it prohibited the use of corporate and union treasury funds to pay for "electioneering communications"—broadcast or cable

2151:

Massachusetts has had a hybrid public funding system for statewide offices since 1978. Taxpayers are allowed to contribute $ 1 to the statewide election fund by checking a box on their annual income taxes. Candidates who agree to spending limits are eligible for money from this fund.

1910:, a case challenging the limit on how much individuals can donate directly to political parties and federal candidates. On April 2, 2014, the Court announced its opinion and maintained aggregate limits on campaign contributions were unconstitutional under the First Amendment. 76:

in 1990 spent on average $ 407,600 (equivalent to $ 950,000 in 2023), while the winner in 2022 spent on average $ 2.79 million; in the Senate, average spending for winning candidates went from $ 3.87 million (equivalent to $ 9.03 million in 2023) to $ 26.53 million.

80:

In 2020, nearly $ 14 billion was spent on federal election campaigns in the United States — "making it the most expensive campaign in U.S. history", "more than double" what was spent in the 2016 election. Critics assert that following a number of Supreme Court decisions —

1784:. The heavy spending of key 527 groups to attack presidential candidates brought complaints to the Federal Elections Commission of illegal coordination between the groups and rival political campaigns. (In 2006 and 2007 the FEC fined a number of organizations, including 2162:

program in 2015, which gives city residents four $ 25 vouchers to donate to participating candidates. Vouchers have been proposed in other cities and states as a means to diversify the donor pool, help more candidates run for office, and boost political engagement.

4981: 643:

protection, employment opportunities, that very high income groups naturally have less interest in being protected by their own private security, their children attending private schools, enjoying scenic beauty and recreation on their country clubs and estates.

1049:

House campaign committee are each considered separate national party committees with separate limits. Only a national party committee, not the parties' national congressional campaign committees, may have an account for the presidential nominating convention.

2183:

personal use is any use of funds in a campaign account of a candidate (or former candidate) to fulfill a commitment, obligation or expense of any person that would exist irrespective of the candidate's campaign or responsibilities as a federal officeholder.

1930:

and other court rulings ended limits on some campaign spending, reformers concerned about the political deck being unfairly stacked "in favor of the few donors able to give large contributions" concentrated on public finance of political campaigns. The

3845: 2867: 620:

however, "several scholars" state that studies "comparing states like Virginia with scant regulation" on political contributions, against those like Wisconsin with "strict rules" have "not found much difference in levels of corruption or public trust".

1481:

prohibited corporations and nationally chartered (interstate) banks from making direct financial contributions to federal candidates. However, weak enforcement mechanisms made the Act ineffective. Disclosure requirements and spending limits for

102:

Public concern over the influence of large donors in political campaigns was reflected in a 2018 opinion poll which found that 74% of Americans surveyed thought it was "very" important that "people who give a lot of money to elected officials"

1576:, the Court upheld the Act's limits on individual contributions, as well as the disclosure and reporting provisions and the public financing scheme. The Court held that limitations on donations to candidates were constitutional because of the 1935:, for example, promotes "small donor public financing", i.e. a system where "public funds match and multiply small donations", the idea being candidates would be incentivized "to seek out many supporters, not just a few big donors". 4279:

Robert G. Kaiser; Alice Crites (research contributor) (2007). "How lobbying became Washington's biggest business – Big money creates a new capital city. As lobbying booms, Washington and politics are transformed." Citizen K Street

2440:, and independent groups spent a total of $ 5.3 billion on federal elections. The amount spent on the presidential race alone was $ 2.4 billion, and over $ 1 billion of that was spent by the campaigns of the two major candidates: 1371:

also make unlimited "independent expenditures" to support or oppose federal candidates. However, since 2002, national parties have been prohibited from accepting any funds outside the limits established for elections in the FECA.

4885: 819:") or national party committees. It also limits how much money (a) individuals and (b) organizations involved in political action may contribute to political campaigns, political parties, and other FEC-regulated organizations. 1544:. In 1974, Congress passed amendments to the FECA establishing a comprehensive system of regulation and enforcement, including public financing of presidential campaigns and the creation of a central enforcement agency, the 1437:

was one of the first American politicians to use what are now conventional campaign techniques of using campaign staffers to help him raise money and secure votes and campaign committees to organize rallies and parades.

2143:

suggested that a key part of most Clean Election laws—a provision granting extra money (or "rescue funds") to participating candidates who are being outspent by non-participating candidates—is unconstitutional. In 2011, in

2061:, setting up the first election since the program's launch in which neither major party nominee accepted federal funding. Nor did either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton accept federal funding for the 2016 general election. 1267:: Super Pacs are unlike other PACs, in that they have no legal limit to the funds they can raise from individuals, corporations, unions and other groups, provided they are operated correctly. They are officially known as " 1297:: A hybrid PAC (sometimes called a Carey Committee) is similar to a Super PAC, but can give limited amounts of money directly to campaigns and committees, while still making independent expenditures in unlimited amounts. 2178:

In other situations where the line between "legitimate campaign and officeholder expenses" and personal spending can be much finer, the Federal Election Commission uses what it calls an "irrespective test," whereby

71:

by contributions from individuals, corporations, political action committees, and sometimes the government. Campaign spending has risen steadily at least since 1990. For example, a candidate who won an election to the

1140:

Lobbyists often assist congressional campaign finance by arranging fundraisers, assembling PACs, and seeking donations from other clients. Many lobbyists become campaign treasurers and fundraisers for congresspersons.

1855:

struck down, on free speech grounds, the limits on the ability of organizations that accepted corporate or union money from running electioneering communications. The Court reasoned that the restrictions permitted by

2084:

were directing money to the fund, leaving the fund chronically short of cash. However, the fact that fewer candidates have chosen to apply for public funding has alleviated the fund's former monetary shortages.

1796:. The FEC's rationale was that these groups had specifically advocated the election or defeat of candidates, thus making them subject to federal regulation and its limits on contributions to the organizations.) 1209:

All outside groups that aren't political parties — except for a few traditional PACs that make independent expenditures — are allowed to accept unlimited sums of money from individuals, corporations or unions.

1607:

because it was for the purpose of electing a candidate and so subject to corruption, and funding for independent expenditures that could not be limited because there was no corruption danger, the Court listed

1580:

in preventing corruption or the appearance of corruption. However, the Court also held that caps on the amount campaigns could spend and caps on independent expenditures were an unconstitutional abridgment of

1357:", and political parties are "527s." However, in common practice the term is usually applied only to such organizations that are not regulated under state or federal campaign finance laws because they do not 734:

there is no evidence that stricter campaign finance rules reduce corruption or raise positive assessments of government. It seems like such an obvious relationship but it has proven impossible to prove.”

4719: 160:"campaign funds" are (legally) defined by the Federal Election Campaign Act as funds "used for purposes in connection with the campaign to influence the federal election of the candidate" (see below). 147:

and the general election. Eligibility requirements must be fulfilled to qualify for a government subsidy, and those that do accept government funding are usually subject to spending limits on money.

1126:

There has been extensive criticism that US presidents have rewarded bundlers with political appointment, most notably ambassador positions where nominees have no qualifications for appointment.

666:

Public financing. A traditional solution offered to dilute the power of a few donors giving large political contributions was to put limits on campaign spending. Following court rulings such as

2068:. In 2012, each major party was entitled to $ 18.2 million in public funds for their conventions. However, the provisions for public funding of nominating conventions were eliminated in 2014. 95:"), and to prevent voters from knowing who is trying to influence them (contributing "dark money" that masks the donor's identity). Consequently, as of at least 2022, critics (such as the 1894:, can raise unlimited funds from individual and corporate donors and use those funds for electioneering advertisements, provided that the Super PAC does not coordinate with a candidate. 2175:

of California, for example, was sentenced to 11 months in prison in 2020 "for spending 2018 campaign donations on family trips to Hawaii and Italy and private school for his children."

6386: 1760:

requiring candidates to appear in campaign advertisements and claim responsibility for the ad (most commonly with a phrase similar to "I'm John Smith and I approve this message.")

1091:

contributors, (i.e. lower than the national limits), while several states (Alabama, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah and Virginia) have no limits at all.

2657: 170:

Hard Money: "regulated contributions (see below) "from an individual or PAC to a federal candidate, party committee or other PAC, where the money is used for a federal election"

120: 6522: 1524:

In 1971, Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), instituting various campaign finance disclosure requirements for federal candidates (those running for the

1874:, in which the Supreme Court upheld the Michigan Campaign Finance Act, which prohibited corporations from using treasury money to support or oppose candidates in elections. 1586: 1948:

individual contribution (up to half of the spending limit). However, candidates who decline matching funds are free to spend as much money as they can raise privately.

5243: 2065: 1445:

Secret campaign donations from newly rich oil, steel, finance and railroad magnates in the late 19th and early 20th century created a "series of campaign scandals".

629:

Reasons offered for why "big money" in politics (campaign contributions and high level lobbying from corporations and the wealthy) should be regulated include: it

6708: 5059: 1278: 1035:" here refers to a committee that makes contributions to other federal political committees. Independent-expenditure-only political committees (sometimes called " 1103:

Although bundling existed in various forms since the enactment of the FECA, bundling became organized in a more structured way in the 2000s, spearheaded by the "

1257:: Elected officials and political parties cannot give more than the federal limit directly to candidates. However, they can set up a leadership PAC that makes 3947: 2152:

Non-participating candidates are required to estimate spending, and this will raise the limit for participating opponents if higher than the agreed-to limit.

6444: 2329: 2080: 2019: 1919: 1429: 660: 3399: 1951:

From the inception of this program in 1976 through 1992, almost all candidates who could qualify accepted matching funds in the primary. In 1996 Republican

1461:

A backlash grew against this influence. In 1905, Teddy Roosevelt unsuccessfully attempted to get Congress to outlaw all corporate political contributions .

1078:

Additionally, a national party committee and its Senatorial campaign committee may contribute up to $ 46,800 combined per campaign to each Senate candidate.

690:

Reform the Federal Election Commission. In 2016, panel votes on enforcement matters deadlocked roughly 1 time in 3, "according to former FEC Commissioner

6586: 6532: 6379: 4529: 485:

financed opponents was an example of the limits of money in politics. However, comparing electoral success with who spent the most running for congress,

6572: 3822: 3800: 3769: 3690: 2489:

How Much Is That in Real Money? A Historical Price Index for Use as a Deflator of Money Values in the Economy of the United States: Addenda et Corrigenda

2119:

A 2003 study by GAO found, "It is too soon to determine the extent to which the goals of Maine's and Arizona's public financing programs are being met."

1420:

in recent years in both state and federal elections, to the point that it now amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. presidential elections.

1116: 1112: 3879: 135:

track how money is raised and spent. Although most campaign spending is privately financed (largely through donors that work in subsidized industries),

4310:

Woodstock Theological Center (2002). "The Ethics of Lobbying: Organized Interests, Political Power, and the Common Good". Georgetown University Press.

4195: 5285: 3935:"The Billionaire Family Business: 50 Billionaire Clans Have Already Spent Over $ 600 Million on the 2024 Elections, Mostly to Preserve Their Fortunes" 2731: 2366: 1906: 300: 4509: 6404: 1781: 1765: 1120: 678:

Other proposals for "fixing" the influence of money in politics in the United States made by at least one reform group (the Brennan Center) include

6609: 4839: 2092:

A small number of states and cities have started to use broader programs for public financing of campaigns. One method, which its supporters call

60: 4255: 1416:(While for many years dark money "overwhelmingly boosting Republicans", in the 2020 presidential election cycle dark money benefited Democrats.) 2171:

Politicians are sometimes tempted to spend campaign funds for personal purposes instead of their election campaign. One U.S. Representative,

99:) allege "big money dominates U.S. political campaigns to a degree not seen in decades" and is "drowning out the voices of ordinary Americans." 6713: 6654: 6582: 6372: 3264: 2437: 1870: 1525: 1483: 602:

elections, the candidate who spends the most, usually wins. This trend is stronger in the House than the Senate but applies in both chambers".

73: 4397: 2763:

Weidman, Jonathan; Shorey, Rachel (November 3, 2022). "Fueled by Billionaires, Political Spending Shatters Records Again". The New York Times.

6145: 6122: 6101: 6082: 6054: 5490: 5227: 5035: 3608: 3206: 1756:

advertisements clearly identifying a federal candidate—within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. The law also included a

1287: 466: 68: 4956: 4803: 2038:

nominee) received matching funds in the primaries. (Primary season matching funds are not limited to major party candidates.) In 2016, only

6418: 6195: 5770: 5731: 2139: 2137:, the Supreme Court held that large parts of Vermont's Clean Elections law were unconstitutional. In 2008, the Supreme Court's decision in 5568: 5270: 5072: 2524: 1282:

that government may not prohibit unions and corporations from making independent expenditure for political purposes. Two months later, in

5518: 4922: 4084: 3497: 1835:

Campaign finance law in the United States changed drastically in the wake of two 2010 judicial opinions: the Supreme Court's decision in

1498:

set an annual ceiling of $ 3 million for political parties' campaign expenditures and $ 5,000 for individual campaign contributions. The

719:", and defends the use of money to buy political influence in the service of conservative governance and "traditional American virtues". 6661: 6616: 6562: 6547: 6506: 3691:"Democracy: An Election Agenda for Candidates, Activists, and Legislators. Five to Four: A Different Approach to Campaign Finance Cases" 2423:

In the 2016 election campaign, $ 5.1 billion was spent in congressional races and $ 2.9 billion was spent in the presidential campaign.

2043: 4483: 6639: 6343: 2952: 2246:

maintains a publicly accessible database for campaign finance information for state-level races in all 50 states dating back to 1989.

1563: 716: 2735: 6666: 6644: 6634: 6527: 6486: 6221: 5392: 5102: 4340: 4315: 3855: 2877: 2027: 1241: 674:

have suggested encouraging "small donor public financing", by using public funds to match and multiply small donations" (see below).

4581: 3895:"Soft Money Is good: Hard Earned American Dollars that Big Brother Has Yet to Find a Way to Control". Roll Call. September 6, 1997. 4616: 2509:

How Much Is That in Real Money? A Historical Price Index for Use as a Deflator of Money Values in the Economy of the United States

6671: 6621: 6604: 6599: 6557: 6496: 6476: 6466: 2268: 2264: 2123: 2035: 1704: 1682: 798:

with unpopular industries and that the industries therefore provide larger contributions to compensate for this loss of support.

5885: 5428: 3598: 2602: 2076:'s 1980 campaign received payments of public funds after the election because he had attained more than 5% of the popular vote. 6594: 6325: 5411: 4561: 2404:

OpenSecrets provides a breakdown of spending for presidential and congressional campaigns for federal elections from 1990-2022.

5360: 3553: 5708:"GAO-03-543 Campaign Finance Reform: Early Experiences of Two States That Offer Full Public Funding for Political Candidates" 3117: 2345: 2053:

No major party nominee turned down government funds for the general election from 1976, when the program was launched, until

1846: 1808: 1748: 1630: 807:

toward repealing the estate tax, reducing capital gains and personal and corporate income taxes, and opposing carbon taxes."

671: 140: 124: 4741: 3669: 5752: 6542: 6395: 4229: 2127: 1813:

The reach of the "electioneering communications" provisions of the BCRA was also limited in the 2007 Supreme Court ruling

1789: 1636: 1519: 1491: 1412:$ 88 million in direct election spending was reported to the Federal Election Commission by politically active nonprofits. 1233: 1135: 3167: 5907: 3975:"Representativeness and Motivations of the Contemporary Donorate: Results from Merged Survey and Administrative Records" 2516: 2496: 1533: 1153:

and those made to parties and committees "for party building in general rather than for specific candidates" are called

1123:

the six leading primary candidates (three Democratic, three Republican) listed a total of nearly two thousand bundlers.

6302: 5707: 3744: 3304:

Powell, Eleanor Neff; Grimmer, Justin (August 3, 2016). "Money in Exile: Campaign Contributions and Committee Access".

6064: 5647: 5468: 5368: 5186: 4749: 4569: 4413: 4110: 2104:

since 2000, where a majority of officials were elected without spending any private contributions on their campaigns.

1860:

were justified based on avoiding corruption or the appearance of corruption, and that this rationale did not apply to

1545: 1541: 1350: 1349:. Technically, almost all political committees, including state, local, and federal candidate committees, traditional 116: 31: 6203: 6199: 6183: 6004: 4514: 3523: 3017: 163:"Dark money": spending to influence elections where the source of the money is not disclosed to voters (see below). 6718: 6423: 6356:

looks at how campaign finance reform and how it has come full circle since the Watergate campaign finance scandals.

6335: 2361: 1932: 1751:. The BCRA, sometimes called the "McCain-Feingold" Act, amended the FECA in several respects. First, it prohibited 1220: 1036: 1032: 937: 904: 758: 136: 96: 92: 88: 2072:

funding in 1996 and 2000 on the basis of Ross Perot's strong showing in the 1992 and 1996 elections. In addition,

4910: 4537: 4398:"Soft Money Is Back — And Both Parties Are Cashing In: Critics Deride The Practice as 'Legalized Money Laundering 4024: 2901: 2627: 1752: 1577: 752:

small individual contributors (defined by the government as being from individuals who contribute $ 200 or less),

447:. Presidential election campaign funding per candidate for the 2016 presidential election main party candidates. 5947: 4646: 3713: 1763:

This law was also challenged in the Supreme Court, but its core provisions were upheld by the Supreme Court in

787: 111:

Laws regulating campaign donations, spending and public funding have been enacted at the federal level by the

6293: 6250: 3790:"Secret Spending in the States", Chisun Lee, Katherine Valde, Benjamin T. Brickner, and Douglas Keith, p.17. 5680: 4586: 2967: 2571: 2356: 2113: 1342: 1268: 1258: 1174: 803: 708: 683:

low as $ 100,000, or even $ 10,000 — pocket change for special interests — can easily dominate an election".

6270: 5871: 2774: 1944:

campaign, public funding was also available to finance the major parties' national nominating conventions.

1499: 4675: 2148:, the Supreme Court struck down the matching funds provision of Arizona's law on First Amendment grounds. 1926: 1849:

report, these two decisions constitute "the most fundamental changes to campaign finance law in decades."

1837: 1757: 1648: 667: 112: 83: 5797:"Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC et al. v. Bennett, Secretary of State of Arizona, et al" 4773: 1877:

Two months later, a unanimous nine-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decided

312:

disbursed. In the 2022 Congressional races, the sources of campaign contributions broke down as follows:

87:(2010) in particular—the "very wealthy" are now allowed to spend unlimited amounts on campaigns (through 6450: 6045:

Selling Out, How Big Corporate Money Buys Elections, Rams Through Legislation, and Betrays Our Democracy

5844: 2042:(Democrat) and Jill Stein (Green) received matching funds in the primaries. For the 2020 campaign, only 1346: 4163: 2057:

did so in 2008. Obama again declined government funds for the 2012 campaign, as did Republican nominee

1503: 1403:$ 660 million came from "opaque political nonprofits and shell companies" and went to "outside" groups; 5825: 5545: 4599: 3974: 3092: 6687: 6626: 6491: 5495: 4176: 3908: 3635: 2714: 1639:, corporations, unions, and individuals could contribute unlimited "nonfederal money"—also known as " 1529: 1487: 712: 6340:

An in-depth look at American campaign finance from the viewpoints of both politicians and lobbyists.

3224:"Campaign Contributions Facilitate Access to Congressional Officials: A Randomized Field Experiment" 2010:

Since the 2012 primary campaign, few candidates have chosen to accept matching funds. In 2012, only

433: 5523: 4281: 3714:"Symposium - Everyone's Fight The New Plan to Defeat Big Money: How Big Money Corrupts the Economy" 1861: 1478: 1313: 52: 44: 4800: 4137: 3067: 2927: 2844: 2064:

Public funding was formerly available to finance the major parties' (and eligible minor parties')

815:

Federal law does not allow corporations and labor unions to donate money directly to candidates ("

6471: 6329: 5594: 5237: 5151: 5119: 5053: 4866: 4701: 4065: 4005: 3468: 3442: 3368: 3329: 2658:"Most Americans want to limit campaign spending, say big donors have greater political influence" 2545: 2376: 2133: 1358: 1273: 179:

Money spent on campaigns in the 21st century has risen somewhat faster than inflation over time.

5774: 2546:"Election Trends.Total Cost of Election (1990-2022). Average House Winner Spending, (1990-2022)" 2039: 6026:

Soft Money and Hard Choices: Why Political Parties Might Legislate Against Soft Money Donations

5094: 4934: 2507: 2487: 6141: 6118: 6097: 6078: 6050: 6033: 6029: 5310: 5223: 5143: 5098: 5041: 5031: 4858: 4819: 4346: 4336: 4311: 4203: 4057: 3997: 3851: 3604: 3321: 3286: 3245: 3202: 2873: 2371: 2339: 2159: 1608: 1559: 1537: 1495: 748:

The money for campaigns for federal office is divided into four broad categories of sources:

724: 296: 292: 128: 5621: 5389: 5257: 5123: 786:

disclosed presidential campaign financing, according to a New York Times analysis of FEC and

6435: 5599: 5457: 5135: 5086: 4853: 4848: 4834: 4487: 4462: 4047: 4039: 3989: 3469:"Can Lower Tax Rates Be Bought? Business Rent-Seeking and Tax Competition Among U.S. States" 3434: 3360: 3313: 3276: 3235: 2503: 2483: 2324: 2318: 2172: 2109: 2073: 1793: 1777: 1568: 1450: 1328: 1167: 288: 284: 144: 64: 39: 5651: 3348: 2816: 1039:") may accept unlimited contributions, including from corporations and labor organizations. 295:

reforms in campaign financing". But the sum that "was considered deeply corrupt during the

6349: 6297: 5415: 5396: 5222:(2009–2010 ed., alternate ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. p. 360. 4807: 4708:

Vol. 27.4 (2012): 683–719. OmniFile Full Text Select (H.W. Wilson). Web. 12 October 2012.

4565: 2093: 2015: 1968: 5796: 5432: 2448:

spent $ 333 million. The total amount spent by Obama and McCain was a record at the time.

5408: 5178: 4720:"Politics It's bold, but legal: How campaigns and their super PAC backers work together" 3905:

Kenneth Mayer, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

3400:"How Campaign Contributions and Lobbying Can Lead to Inefficient Economic Policy Report" 283:

notes that in 1972 a $ 2 million dollar political donation by an insurance magnate (by

6537: 6307: 6134: 5008:

Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right

4624: 4381:

Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right

4366:

Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right

3195: 3140: 2689: 1956: 1470: 1434: 1108: 616: 291:) in 1972 "caused public outrage and contributed to a movement that produced the post- 5339: 4196:"Analysis | One-third of Biden's ambassador nominees, so far, are campaign 'bundlers'" 3584:"Campaign Contributions Influence Public Policy, Finds Study of 50 State Legislatures" 3421:

Richter, Brian Kelleher; Samphantharak, Krislert; Timmons, Jeffrey F. (October 2009).

2603:"Total 2020 election spending to hit nearly $ 14 billion, more than double 2016′s sum" 1490:

candidates followed in 1910 and 1911. General contribution limits were enacted in the

17: 6702: 6501: 6318: 6074: 6043: 5849: 5155: 5087: 5021: 4870: 4298: 4069: 3438: 3333: 1980: 56: 6136:

Money, Power & Election: How Campaign Finance Reform Subverts American Democracy

5089:

Free Speech on Trial: Communication Perspectives on Landmark Supreme Court Decisions

4558: 4009: 3372: 773: 730:

Political scientist Kenneth Mayer also agrees that looking at those 1970s reforms,

151:

federal campaign database which does not include state and local campaign spending.

6649: 6353: 5124:"Campaign Finance Transparency Affects Legislators' Election Outcomes and Behavior" 4671: 2441: 2334: 2054: 2023: 2011: 2004: 1992: 1972: 1952: 1104: 727:

campaign finance system has accomplished the broad goals its supporters asserted."

647: 132: 5030:. Shaw, Daron R., Grossmann, Matthew,, Lipsitz, Keena (Third ed.). New York. 3583: 3125: 1747:

In 2002, Congress further attempted to reform federal campaign financing with the

429: 6112: 6068: 5217: 6364: 5933: 5756: 4930: 4886:"Is your grocery bill supporting your political opponents? Now you can avoid it" 4620: 4603: 4440: 2993: 2788: 2445: 2351: 2308:

Many localities have their own reporting requirements that are not listed here.

2243: 2222: 2216: 2105: 2058: 1984: 1976: 1964: 1920:

Campaign finance reform in the United States § Current proposals for reform

1582: 1507: 1474: 1384: 1237: 782: 704: 486: 5271:"State of Campaign Finance Policy: Recent Developments and Issues for Congress" 5179:"Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. Federal Election Commission" 4424: 3042: 1442:

realized they had much to gain by supporting politicians election campaigns.

6428: 5045: 4533: 4109:

Page, Benjamin I.; Seawright, Jason; Lacombe, Matthew J. (September 2, 2015).

3993: 3171: 2285: 2257: 2046:(Democrat) had announced plans to apply for matching funds by September 2019. 2031: 1996: 1960: 1785: 1446: 1396: 1354: 1302: 1100:

honorary titles and, in some cases, exclusive events featuring the candidate.

280: 5147: 4862: 4350: 4207: 4061: 4001: 3325: 3290: 3249: 1225:

Federal law allows for multiple types of political action committees (PACs).

6552: 6481: 5685: 3281: 3223: 2281: 2253: 2000: 691: 303:

bundled $ 889 million for a "political war chest" for that year's election.

6285: 6156:

Writing Reform: A Guide to Drafting State & Local Campaign Finance Laws

5025: 2122:

The "Clean Elections" movement had several defeats in the 2000s and 2010s.

755:

large individual contributors (individuals who contribute more than $ 200),

489:

found that while "money doesn't always equal victory ... it usually does."

189:

Total cost of Federal elections, Congressional and Presidential (1990-2022)

6008: 5546:"Obama to Break Promise, Opt Out of Public Financing for General Election" 5168:

McConnell v. Federal Election Comm'n, 540 U.S. 93, 123–24 & n.7 (2003)

4909:

Brennan Center for Justice, New York University Law School, 26 Jun. 2016,

3823:"Democracy: An Election Agenda for Candidates, Activists, and Legislators" 3801:"Democracy: An Election Agenda for Candidates, Activists, and Legislators" 3770:"Democracy: An Election Agenda for Candidates, Activists, and Legislators" 1362:

their donors and file periodic reports of contributions and expenditures.

5732:"California Proposition 15, Public Funding of Some Elections (June 2010)" 5085:

Smith, Craig R. (2003). "Buckley v. Valeo". In Parker, Richard A. (ed.).

4778: 4680: 4294: 4052: 3847:

Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the

3145: 2869:

Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the

2295: 2277: 2249: 2232: 2226: 1988: 3446: 3422: 2271:

maintains public databases on campaign finance and lobbying activities.

500:

Percent of races won by top spending candidate for U.S. House and Senate

299:" was worth about $ 11 million adjusted for inflation by 2016, when the 6313: 5139: 4043: 3240: 2736:"State Limits on Contributions to Candidates. 2021-2022 Election Cycle" 2395:

90% of Americans surveyed thought it was "very" or "somewhat" important

2155: 2097: 633:"results in corruption"; (i.e., “quid pro quo corruption”, or bribery); 6260: 428:

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on

6255: 4982:"'Dark money' topped $ 1 billion in 2020, largely boosting Democrats" 4179:(August 31, 2007). "Use of Bundlers Raises New Risks for Campaigns". 4085:"Just 27 billionaires spent $ 90 million to buy GOP Congress: report" 3946:

Confessore, Nicholas; Cohen, Sarah; Yourish, Karen (August 1, 2015).

3881:

Campaign Finance "Reform": The Good, The Bad and the Unconstitutional

2989: 193:(In billions of dollars, adjusted for inflation. Source: OpenSecrets) 6155: 1967:

chose not to take matching funds in the primary. In 2008, Democrats

6202:

external links, and converting useful links where appropriate into

3364: 3317: 2902:"Fueled by Billionaires, Political Spending Shatters Records Again" 1640: 816: 4293:

William Kerr, William Lincoln, Prachi Mishra (22 November 2011). "

2101: 772: 703:

At least many conservatives such as former Secretary of Education

38: 6290: 6240: 4704:. "Updating Disclosure for the New Era of Independent Spending". 3670:"Corporate Money in Politics Threatens US democracy--or does it?" 2267:

maintains a database searchable by the public. In California the

123:. Nonprofit, non-governmental grassroots organizations like the 6567: 5826:"State Funding Program Unlikely To Make Dent In Governor's Race" 5216:

Bardes, Steffen W. Schmidt, Mack C. Shelley, Barbara A. (2009).

4799:

The Center for Public Integrity, 527 Frequently Asked Questions

1904:

On February 19, 2013, the Supreme Court announced it would hear

6368: 5969: 5595:"Sorry America, Trump and Clinton Don't Want Your $ 96 Million" 5027:

Campaigns and elections : rules, reality, strategy, choice

4957:

How 2014 Is Shaping Up to be the Darkest Money Election to Date

4510:"DeMint's PAC Spends $ 1.5 Million in Independent Expenditures" 2688:

Charles W. Bryant; Melanie Radzicki McManus (October 6, 2020).

2108:

passed a Clean Elections law in 2005, along with the cities of

1149:

Contributions made directly to a specific candidate are called

6275: 6245: 6166: 6070:

Citizens Divided: Campaign Finance Reform and the Constitution

5929: 5519:"Why did only 1 presidential candidate take public financing?" 5361:"FEC Approves Matching Funds for 2004 Presidential Candidates" 4801:

http://projects.publicintegrity.org/527/default.aspx?act=faq#5

4141: 1453:'s election in 1896 and 1900 from Rockefeller's Standard Oil. 414: 6359: 5910:. Federal Election Commission of the United States of America 5886:"Democracy How to "Follow the Money" in a Political Campaign" 3600:

The Influence of Campaign Contributions in State Legislatures

2758: 2756: 3265:"Campaign Contributions, Access, and Government Contracting" 1815:

Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.

670:, putting an end to some of these limits, reformers such as 3498:"How to understand campaign finance and why it's important" 3349:"Quid Pro Quo? Corporate Returns to Campaign Contributions" 1430:

Campaign finance reform in the United States § History

639:

decreases public interest in public affairs and government;

471:

subsequently received more contracts." A 2016 study in the

6280: 5995:

Sides, John; Shaw, Daron; Grossman, Matt; Lipsitz, Keena.

5569:"Romney Shunning Federal Funds in Post-Watergate Election" 4820:"The FEC and the Federal Campaign Finance Law: Disclosure" 4435: 4433: 4333:

Political sociology: oppression, resistance, and the state

4194:

Meyer, Theodoric; Alemany, Jacqueline (January 19, 2022).

3764: 3762: 3476:

Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Working Paper Series

3011: 3009: 3007: 3005: 3003: 2146:

Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett

1200:

Spending by outside organizations/independent expenditures

1193: 6265: 4980:

Massoglia, Anna; Evers-Hillstrom, Karl (March 17, 2021).

5997:

Campaigns and Elections Rules, Reality, Strategy, Choice

5286:"Supreme Court to hear case on campaign donation limits" 5093:. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press. pp. 3018:"Most expensive ever: 2020 election cost $ 14.4 billion" 2570:

Levine, Ally J.; Funakoshi, Minami (November 24, 2020).

2079:

The presidential public financing system is funded by a

6191: 6186:

may not follow Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines

5845:"'Democracy vouchers' win in Seattle; first in country" 5256:

Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, 2010, "

4528:

Stern, Marcus; LaFleur, Jennifer (September 26, 2009).

4118:. San Francisco: American Political Science Association 1991:

decided not to take primary matching funds. Republican

4025:"Electoral Contributions and the Cost of Unpopularity" 3222:

Kalla, Joshua L.; Broockman, David E. (July 1, 2016).

2900:

Weisman, Jonathan; Shorey, Rachel (November 3, 2022).

6235: 5075:, U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, April 15, 2002 4975: 4973: 4971: 4969: 4967: 4965: 3948:"Small Pool of Rich Donors Dominates Election Giving" 3712:

Hacker, Jacob S.; Loewentheil, Nathan (Winter 2003).

1645:

Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. FEC

3909:"Does Corporate Money Lead to Political Corruption?" 3636:"Does Corporate Money Lead to Political Corruption?" 3467:

Chirinko, Robert S.; Wilson, Daniel J. (June 2010).

3269:

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

1173:

Another form of soft money is political spending by

6680: 6581: 6515: 6459: 6411: 6114:

Unfree Speech: The Folly of Campaign Finance Reform

3629: 3627: 3578: 3576: 3574: 3393: 3391: 3389: 6133: 6042: 5458:"Public funds received by candidates 1976-present" 5452: 5450: 5311:"McCutcheon et al. v. Federal Election Commission" 4318:. (See page 1 of "The Ethics of Lobbying" chapter) 3973:Hill, Seth J.; Huber, Gregory A. (March 1, 2017). 3194: 2444:spent $ 730 million in his election campaign, and 1841:and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in 1424:History of campaign finance in the United States 4256:"Whatever happened to those bundler-ambassadors?" 3663: 3661: 3659: 3657: 30:"Soft money" redirects here. For other uses, see 27:Contributions to American election campaign funds 6007:. The Campaign Finance Institute. Archived from 3803:. The Brennan Center for Justice. pp. 24–25 3772:. The Brennan Center for Justice. pp. 23–24 2651: 2649: 2622: 2620: 1899:McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (2014) 1395:A major loophole to disclosure requirements is " 167:federal contribution limits" on it (see below). 5491:"Bullock to seek public financing for 2020 bid" 4392: 4390: 3825:. The Brennan Center for Justice. pp. 25–6 2596: 2594: 2592: 1598:to limit donations in campaigns, not spending. 1457:Early attempts at regulating money in campaigns 3739: 3737: 3735: 2477: 2475: 1955:opted out of the program. In 2000, Forbes and 1279:Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 47:depicting the American campaign finance system 6380: 5273:. Journalist's Resource.org. October 3, 2011. 4676:"Colbert gets a Super PAC; So what are they?" 3668:Primo, David; Milyo, Jeffrey (July 6, 2020). 3548: 3546: 3544: 3168:"Banking on Becoming President - OpenSecrets" 2683: 2681: 2679: 2677: 2675: 847:Additional National Party Committee Accounts 8: 5242:: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( 3693:. The Brennan Center for Justice. p. 22 2839: 2837: 2726: 2724: 2330:Campaign finance reform in the United States 1069:Indexed for inflation in odd-numbered years. 972:State, District & Local Party Committee 661:Campaign finance reform in the United States 279:Over the decades it has risen much faster. 4582:"Congress 101: Political Action Committees" 4508:Kurtzleben, Danielle (September 27, 2010). 4414:"Tracking the 2016 Presidential Money Race" 3745:"Public campaign financing. Why it matters" 3398:Craig, John; Madland, David (May 2, 2014). 3016:Evers-Hillstrom, Karl (February 11, 2021). 794:perception of the stakes in the election." 764:self-financing (the candidate's own money). 139:is available for qualifying candidates for 6387: 6373: 6365: 6303:Campaign Cash Since Citizens United Ruling 6024:Gill, David; Lipsmeyer, Christine (2005). 5681:"Taxpayers elect not to pay for campaigns" 5588: 5586: 5058:: CS1 maint: location missing publisher ( 4742:"FEC Terminology for Candidate Committees" 4530:"Leadership PACs: Let the Good Times Roll" 4023:Bassetti, Thomas; Pavesi, Filippo (2017). 3907:Kirkpatrick, David D. (January 23, 2010). 3634:Kirkpatrick, David D. (January 23, 2010). 1658: 1406:$ 170 million was spent on TV advertising; 6222:Learn how and when to remove this message 4852: 4051: 3280: 3239: 3141:"2008 campaign costliest in U.S. history" 2811: 2809: 2732:National Conference of State Legislatures 2715:"Graph analysis of FEC donation data.PDF" 2367:Political corruption in the United States 1907:McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission 6344:Political Finance data for United States 5284:Schouten, Fredreka (February 19, 2013). 5219:American government & politics today 4230:"Another Obama bundler named ambassador" 4138:"A Century Of U.S. Campaign Finance Law" 3933:Americans for Tax Fairness, 15 May 2024 3524:"Is This the End of Big-Money Politics?" 2192: 1776:Furthermore, the BCRA did not regulate " 1766:McConnell v. Federal Election Commission 1086:State and local contribution regulations 821: 314: 4854:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113428 4840:Annual Review of Law and Social Science 2525:"Consumer Price Index (estimate) 1800–" 2471: 2388: 1065: 1063: 1061: 1059: 1057: 1055: 1024: 6094:The Fallacy of Campaign Finance Reform 5567:Salant, Jonathan D. (April 27, 2012). 5235: 5051: 1959:opted out. In 2004 Bush and Democrats 1871:Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce 1345:named after "Section 527" of the U.S. 6709:Campaign finance in the United States 6460:Major industrial and business lobbies 5489:Greenwood, Max (September 30, 2019). 5128:American Journal of Political Science 4326: 4324: 4112:Stealth Politics by U.S. Billionaires 3496:Joseph Calabrese (October 22, 2018). 3427:American Journal of Political Science 3228:American Journal of Political Science 3139:Cummings, Jeanne (November 5, 2008). 2523:Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. 1625:Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (2002) 1506:(1947) extended the corporate ban to 1288:Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 984: 467:American Journal of Political Science 7: 6140:. Louisiana State University Press. 4772:Levinthal, Dave (January 21, 2012). 2845:"Total Cost of Election (1990-2022)" 2601:Schwartz, Brian (October 28, 2020). 2140:Davis v. Federal Election Commission 1514:Federal Election Campaign Act (1971) 1175:"independent expenditure committees" 1145:"Soft" money/Independent expenditure 841:State/District/Local Party Committee 6326:"Take the Money and Run for Office" 3850:. Knopf Doubleday. pp. 234–5. 2066:presidential nominating conventions 1753:national political party committees 1655:Soft money raised from 1993 to 2002 1409:132 million on digital advertising; 1181:independent expenditure committees, 777:Political donations by major donors 5950:. Pennsylvania Department of State 5804:Supreme Court of the United States 5548:. Blogs.abcnews.com. June 19, 2008 5517:Watson, Libby (January 27, 2016). 5318:Supreme Court of the United States 4833:Wood, Abby K. (October 13, 2018). 4331:Deric, Shannon (January 1, 2011). 2007:elected to take public financing. 1792:, for violations arising from the 1562:of the FECA was challenged in the 25: 2167:Ethics of spending campaign funds 1383:Various organizations, including 464:A 2016 experimental study in the 6171: 6049:. Regan Books (Harper Collins). 6005:"Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act" 5972:. California Department of State 4083:Stancil, Kenny (July 19, 2022). 3603:. University of Michigan Press. 3439:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00407.x 3118:"The Money Behind the Elections" 2436:In 2008, candidates for office, 2014:(who ran unsuccessfully for the 419: 6334:. Episode 461. March 30, 2012. 6291:Center for Competitive Politics 6154:Torres-Spelliscy, Ciara (ed.), 6096:. University of Chicago Press. 5843:Young, Bob (November 3, 2015). 5622:"Convention funding eliminated" 5340:"Quick Answers: Public Funding" 5260:", last accessed Apr. 10, 2012. 5187:IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law 4959:, OpenSecrets (April 30, 2014). 4911:"Secret Spending in the States" 4441:"Dark Money. Dark Money Basics" 1594:courts came to the decision in 1130:Advocacy groups/interest groups 301:Koch brothers political network 6117:. Princeton University Press. 5948:"Campaign Finance Information" 5593:Gimein, Mark (June 14, 2016). 4822:. Federal Election Commission. 4559:"Leadership PACs and Sponsors" 4254:Kamen, Al (December 6, 2021). 3402:. Center for American Progress 2872:. Knopf Doubleday. p. 8. 2817:"Academic Resources: Glossary" 2656:JONES, BRADLEY (May 8, 2018). 2346:FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life 1864:to independent organizations. 1847:Congressional Research Service 1809:FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life 1801:FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life 1749:Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 1631:Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 1194:Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 672:The Brennan Center for Justice 646:wastes economic resources on " 141:President of the United States 125:Center for Responsive Politics 1: 6714:Lobbying in the United States 6396:Lobbying in the United States 4835:"Campaign Finance Disclosure" 4706:Journal of Law & Politics 4425:"Políticas Parties: Overview" 4295:The dynamics of firm lobbying 4228:Sink, Justin (June 6, 2014). 3522:Mayer, Jane (March 3, 2016). 3263:Witko, C. (October 1, 2011). 3201:. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. 2128:California ballot proposition 1914:Public financing of campaigns 1826:Citizens United v. FEC (2010) 1790:Swift Boat Veterans for Truth 1520:Federal Election Campaign Act 1492:Federal Corrupt Practices Act 1234:Federal Election Campaign Act 1205:"independent expenditures". 1136:Lobbying in the United States 74:U.S. House of Representatives 6073:. Cambridge, Massachusetts: 4718:Gold, Matea (July 6, 2015). 4515:U.S. News & World Report 4463:"SSFs and Nonconnected PACs" 4383:. Doubleday. pp. 228–9. 3878:James Boop (July 19, 1999). 2690:"How Campaign Finance Works" 2517:American Antiquarian Society 2497:American Antiquarian Society 2094:Clean Money, Clean Elections 1758:"stand by your ad" provision 1494:(1925). An amendment to the 6236:Federal Election Commission 5888:. ProPublica. November 2022 5648:Federal Election Commission 5469:Federal Election Commission 5369:Federal Election Commission 5206:McConnell, 540 U.S. at 126. 4750:Federal Election Commission 4570:Federal Election Commission 3718:Democracy, Journal of Ideas 2968:"Where the Money Came From" 2928:"Where the Money Came From" 1830:SpeechNOW.org v. FEC (2010) 1546:Federal Election Commission 1542:political action committees 1351:political action committees 1215:Political action committees 1117:2004 presidential campaigns 811:Federal contribution limits 759:political action committees 739:Sources of campaign funding 480:Impact on electoral success 117:Federal Election Commission 89:Political Action Committees 32:Soft money (disambiguation) 6735: 6516:Major single-issue lobbies 6424:Political action committee 6336:Public Radio International 6266:Campaign Finance Institute 5872:"Democracy Policy Network" 4774:"Meet the super super PAC" 2632:Brennan Center for Justice 2362:Political action committee 1933:Brennan Center for Justice 1917: 1806: 1782:2004 presidential election 1628: 1616:Random audits in the 1970s 1517: 1427: 1326: 1311: 1300: 1221:Political action committee 1218: 1133: 658: 636:harms trust in government; 121:independent federal agency 97:Brennan Center for Justice 29: 6402: 5999:. W.W Norton and Company. 5771:"Campaign Finance Reform" 5431:. Fec.gov. Archived from 5399:, Tancredo certification. 4617:"Outside Spending (2010)" 4396:Politico, 4 August 2017, 4368:. Doubleday. p. 228. 3994:10.1007/s11109-016-9343-y 3597:Powell, Lynda W. (2012). 2252:has state-level data for 1939:Of presidential campaigns 1578:compelling state interest 1008: 992:National Party Committee 896: 827: 824: 4412:Bloomberg, 9 Dec. 2016, 3193:Dziedzic, Nancy (2012). 2990:"2016 Presidential Race" 2628:"Influence of Big Money" 1868:overruled the 1990 case 1532:, the President and the 1259:independent expenditures 844:National Party Committee 788:Internal Revenue Service 589:House of Representatives 155:Terminology, definitions 6296:March 28, 2014, at the 6158:(2010 Revised Edition). 6111:Smith, Bradley (2001). 5970:"Welcome to Cal-Access" 4806:April 11, 2011, at the 4587:Congressional Quarterly 4301:. Retrieved 2012-01-13. 4284:. Retrieved 2012-01-13. 3347:Anthony Fowler (2020). 3306:The Journal of Politics 2357:No corporate PAC pledge 2114:Albuquerque, New Mexico 1845:. According to a 2011 1819:Wisconsin Right to Life 1553:Buckley v. Valeo (1976) 1469:Named for its sponsor, 1343:tax-exempt organization 1269:independent-expenditure 804:Northwestern University 709:The Heritage Foundation 455:Impact of contributions 6132:Smith, Rodney (2006). 6092:Samples, John (2006). 5753:"Anchorage Daily News" 4933:. 2015. Archived from 4923:"Political Nonprofits" 3884:. Heritage Foundation. 2775:"Making disbursements" 2186: 1927:Citizens United v. FEC 1838:Citizens United v. FEC 1649:campaign contributions 1391:"Dark money" exception 1341:is a type of American 1212: 1184:527 organizations, and 967:per account, per year 932:per account, per year 879:per account, per year 838:(SSF and Nonconnected) 778: 736: 699:Criticism of solutions 668:Citizens United v. FEC 84:Citizens United v. FEC 48: 18:Bundling (fundraising) 6451:Legislative scorecard 6350:The Cost of Campaigns 6261:Campaign Legal Center 6256:CQ PoliticalMoneyLine 5435:on September 16, 2008 4162:Table taken from the 3282:10.1093/jopart/mur005 2660:. Pew Research Center 2572:"Financial Sinkholes" 2298:for a few locations. 2181: 2088:State and local level 1428:Further information: 1347:Internal Revenue Code 1207: 1187:501(c) organizations. 776: 732: 659:Further information: 42: 6688:Congressional caucus 6192:improve this article 6041:Green, Mark (2002). 5652:"Annual Report 1980" 5006:Mayer, Jane (2016). 4540:on December 20, 2009 4379:Mayer, Jane (2016). 4364:Mayer, Jane (2016). 4335:. Pine Forge Press. 4177:David D. Kirkpatrick 3954:. The New York Times 3915:. The New York Times 3844:Mayer, Jane (2016). 3642:. The New York Times 3423:"Lobbying and Taxes" 2908:. The New York Times 2866:Mayer, Jane (2016). 2263:In Pennsylvania the 2158:voters approved the 1843:SpeechNow.org v. FEC 1359:"expressly advocate" 1308:501(c) organizations 1284:Speechnow.org v. FEC 884:Candidate Committee 769:Super wealthy donors 460:Impact on recipients 115:and enforced by the 6286:Moneyed Politicians 6204:footnote references 5759:on January 2, 2009. 5524:Sunlight Foundation 5120:Grose, Christian R. 5073:"Case No. 00-60779" 4890:The Washington Post 4282:The Washington Post 4166:on 14 January 2016. 3353:Journal of Politics 2789:"Dark Money Basics" 2265:Department of State 2195: 1862:corporate donations 1726:Total contributions 1612:dark money groups. 1479:Tillman Act of 1907 1465:Tillman Act of 1907 1314:501(c) organization 985:Unlimited Transfers 940:—Nonmulticandidate 922:per year (combined) 897:Unlimited Transfers 833:Candidate Committee 473:Journal of Politics 394:Senate Republicans 53:electoral campaigns 45:Sunlight Foundation 6538:Federal leadership 6331:This American Life 5414:2008-09-16 at the 5395:2008-09-16 at the 5140:10.1111/ajps.12676 4702:Briffault, Richard 4627:on August 27, 2021 4564:2012-03-10 at the 4484:"20090309PACcount" 4427:. Opensecrets.org. 4181:The New York Times 4144:. January 21, 2010 4044:10.1111/ecin.12461 3982:Political Behavior 3952:The New York Times 3913:The New York Times 3640:The New York Times 3241:10.1111/ajps.12180 3068:"Cost of Election" 2953:"Cost of election" 2906:The New York Times 2377:Testing the waters 2269:Secretary of State 2193: 2134:Randall v. Sorrell 1975:, and Republicans 1881:, which relied on 1564:U.S. Supreme Court 1500:Smith–Connally Act 1274:U.S. Supreme Court 779: 744:Funding categories 707:and James Bopp of 360:House Republicans 318:2022 Congressional 267:Congressional race 49: 6719:Political funding 6696: 6695: 6655:Anti-Israel lobby 6631: 6305:—video report by 6232: 6231: 6224: 6147:978-0-8071-3128-2 6124:978-0-691-11369-2 6103:978-0-226-73450-7 6084:978-0-674-72900-1 6056:978-0-06-052392-3 6028:. Public Choice. 6011:on March 17, 2005 5229:978-0-495-56871-1 5037:978-0-393-64053-3 4884:Itkowitz, Colby. 4722:. Washington Post 4674:(June 30, 2011). 4600:"Leadership PACs" 3747:. August 22, 2012 3610:978-0-472-07172-2 3502:USCAnnanbergMedia 3208:978-0-7377-5434-6 3197:Election Spending 3128:on March 7, 2016. 3093:"Election Trends" 2438:political parties 2372:Political finance 2340:Eight Magic Words 2306: 2305: 2160:Democracy voucher 2081:$ 3 tax check-off 1778:527 organizations 1745: 1744: 1602:Eight magic words 1560:constitutionality 1538:political parties 1496:Hatch Act of 1939 1449:raised money for 1366:Political parties 1323:527 organizations 1249:Nonconnected PACs 1016: 1015: 655:Solutions/Reforms 614:According to the 441: 440: 410: 409: 377:Senate Democrats 333:Political Action 328:Large Individual 323:Small Individual 273:Presidential race 194: 175:Campaign spending 129:Consumer Watchdog 51:The financing of 16:(Redirected from 6726: 6629: 6441:Campaign finance 6436:527 organization 6389: 6382: 6375: 6366: 6339: 6314:Cash Attack 2010 6227: 6220: 6216: 6213: 6207: 6175: 6174: 6167: 6151: 6139: 6128: 6107: 6088: 6060: 6048: 6037: 6020: 6018: 6016: 6000: 5982: 5981: 5979: 5977: 5966: 5960: 5959: 5957: 5955: 5944: 5938: 5937: 5926: 5920: 5919: 5917: 5915: 5904: 5898: 5897: 5895: 5893: 5882: 5876: 5875: 5868: 5862: 5861: 5859: 5857: 5840: 5834: 5833: 5822: 5816: 5815: 5813: 5811: 5801: 5793: 5787: 5786: 5784: 5782: 5773:. Archived from 5767: 5761: 5760: 5755:. Archived from 5749: 5743: 5742: 5740: 5738: 5728: 5722: 5721: 5719: 5717: 5712: 5704: 5698: 5697: 5695: 5693: 5677: 5671: 5670: 5668: 5666: 5656: 5644: 5638: 5637: 5635: 5633: 5618: 5612: 5611: 5609: 5607: 5590: 5581: 5580: 5578: 5576: 5564: 5558: 5557: 5555: 5553: 5542: 5536: 5535: 5533: 5531: 5514: 5508: 5507: 5505: 5503: 5486: 5480: 5479: 5477: 5475: 5462: 5454: 5445: 5444: 5442: 5440: 5425: 5419: 5418:, dodd eligible. 5406: 5400: 5387: 5381: 5380: 5378: 5376: 5357: 5351: 5350: 5348: 5346: 5336: 5330: 5329: 5327: 5325: 5315: 5307: 5301: 5300: 5298: 5296: 5281: 5275: 5274: 5267: 5261: 5254: 5248: 5247: 5241: 5233: 5213: 5207: 5204: 5198: 5197: 5195: 5193: 5175: 5169: 5166: 5160: 5159: 5115: 5109: 5108: 5092: 5082: 5076: 5070: 5064: 5063: 5057: 5049: 5018: 5012: 5011: 5003: 4997: 4996: 4994: 4992: 4977: 4960: 4955:Robert Maguire, 4953: 4947: 4946: 4944: 4942: 4937:on June 20, 2020 4919: 4913: 4907: 4901: 4900: 4898: 4896: 4881: 4875: 4874: 4856: 4830: 4824: 4823: 4816: 4810: 4797: 4791: 4790: 4788: 4786: 4769: 4763: 4762: 4760: 4758: 4746: 4738: 4732: 4731: 4729: 4727: 4715: 4709: 4699: 4693: 4692: 4690: 4688: 4668: 4662: 4661: 4659: 4657: 4643: 4637: 4636: 4634: 4632: 4623:. Archived from 4613: 4607: 4597: 4591: 4579: 4573: 4556: 4550: 4549: 4547: 4545: 4536:. Archived from 4525: 4519: 4506: 4500: 4499: 4497: 4495: 4490:on March 3, 2016 4486:. Archived from 4480: 4474: 4473: 4471: 4469: 4459: 4453: 4452: 4450: 4448: 4437: 4428: 4422: 4416: 4410: 4404: 4401: 4394: 4385: 4384: 4376: 4370: 4369: 4361: 4355: 4354: 4328: 4319: 4308: 4302: 4291: 4285: 4277: 4271: 4270: 4268: 4266: 4251: 4245: 4244: 4242: 4240: 4225: 4219: 4218: 4216: 4214: 4191: 4185: 4184: 4173: 4167: 4160: 4154: 4153: 4151: 4149: 4134: 4128: 4127: 4125: 4123: 4117: 4106: 4100: 4099: 4097: 4095: 4080: 4074: 4073: 4055: 4038:(4): 1771–1791. 4032:Economic Inquiry 4029: 4020: 4014: 4013: 3979: 3970: 3964: 3963: 3961: 3959: 3943: 3937: 3931: 3925: 3924: 3922: 3920: 3903: 3897: 3896: 3892: 3886: 3885: 3875: 3869: 3868: 3866: 3864: 3841: 3835: 3834: 3832: 3830: 3819: 3813: 3812: 3810: 3808: 3797: 3791: 3788: 3782: 3781: 3779: 3777: 3766: 3757: 3756: 3754: 3752: 3741: 3730: 3729: 3727: 3725: 3709: 3703: 3702: 3700: 3698: 3687: 3681: 3680: 3678: 3676: 3665: 3652: 3651: 3649: 3647: 3631: 3622: 3621: 3619: 3617: 3594: 3588: 3587: 3580: 3569: 3568: 3566: 3564: 3554:"Did Money Win?" 3550: 3539: 3538: 3536: 3534: 3519: 3513: 3512: 3510: 3508: 3493: 3487: 3486: 3484: 3482: 3473: 3464: 3458: 3457: 3455: 3453: 3418: 3412: 3411: 3409: 3407: 3395: 3384: 3383: 3381: 3379: 3344: 3338: 3337: 3301: 3295: 3294: 3284: 3260: 3254: 3253: 3243: 3219: 3213: 3212: 3200: 3190: 3184: 3183: 3181: 3179: 3174:on April 8, 2012 3170:. Archived from 3164: 3158: 3157: 3155: 3153: 3136: 3130: 3129: 3124:. Archived from 3114: 3108: 3107: 3105: 3103: 3089: 3083: 3082: 3080: 3078: 3064: 3058: 3057: 3055: 3053: 3039: 3033: 3032: 3030: 3028: 3013: 2998: 2997: 2986: 2980: 2979: 2977: 2975: 2964: 2962: 2960: 2949: 2943: 2942: 2940: 2938: 2924: 2918: 2917: 2915: 2913: 2897: 2891: 2890: 2888: 2886: 2863: 2857: 2856: 2854: 2852: 2841: 2832: 2831: 2829: 2827: 2813: 2804: 2803: 2801: 2799: 2785: 2779: 2778: 2771: 2765: 2764: 2760: 2751: 2750: 2748: 2746: 2740: 2728: 2719: 2718: 2711: 2705: 2704: 2702: 2700: 2685: 2670: 2669: 2667: 2665: 2653: 2644: 2643: 2641: 2639: 2624: 2615: 2614: 2612: 2610: 2598: 2587: 2586: 2584: 2582: 2567: 2561: 2560: 2558: 2556: 2542: 2536: 2535: 2533: 2531: 2520: 2514: 2500: 2494: 2479: 2459: 2455: 2449: 2411: 2405: 2402: 2396: 2393: 2325:Campaign finance 2319:Buckley v. Valeo 2202:campaign finance 2196: 2173:Duncan D. Hunter 2110:Portland, Oregon 2074:John B. Anderson 1705:Republican Party 1683:Democratic Party 1659: 1596:Buckley v. Valeo 1589:. In addition, 1569:Buckley v. Valeo 1504:Taft–Hartley Act 1451:William McKinley 1375:Disclosure rules 1335:527 organization 1329:527 organization 1168:money laundering 1079: 1076: 1070: 1067: 1050: 1046: 1040: 1029: 907:—Multicandidate 822: 594: 588: 423: 422: 415: 343:House Democrats 315: 289:Richard M. Nixon 285:W. Clement Stone 272: 266: 192: 143:during both the 137:public financing 21: 6734: 6733: 6729: 6728: 6727: 6725: 6724: 6723: 6699: 6698: 6697: 6692: 6676: 6577: 6511: 6487:Organized labor 6455: 6419:Direct lobbying 6407: 6398: 6393: 6324: 6298:Wayback Machine 6271:Public Campaign 6251:RedBlue Tracker 6246:OpenSecrets.org 6228: 6217: 6211: 6208: 6189: 6180:This article's 6176: 6172: 6165: 6148: 6131: 6125: 6110: 6104: 6091: 6085: 6065:Post, Robert C. 6063: 6057: 6040: 6023: 6014: 6012: 6003: 5994: 5991: 5989:Further reading 5986: 5985: 5975: 5973: 5968: 5967: 5963: 5953: 5951: 5946: 5945: 5941: 5928: 5927: 5923: 5913: 5911: 5906: 5905: 5901: 5891: 5889: 5884: 5883: 5879: 5870: 5869: 5865: 5855: 5853: 5842: 5841: 5837: 5824: 5823: 5819: 5809: 5807: 5806:. June 27, 2011 5799: 5795: 5794: 5790: 5780: 5778: 5777:on May 14, 2013 5769: 5768: 5764: 5751: 5750: 5746: 5736: 5734: 5730: 5729: 5725: 5715: 5713: 5710: 5706: 5705: 5701: 5691: 5689: 5679: 5678: 5674: 5664: 5662: 5654: 5646: 5645: 5641: 5631: 5629: 5628:. April 4, 2014 5620: 5619: 5615: 5605: 5603: 5592: 5591: 5584: 5574: 5572: 5566: 5565: 5561: 5551: 5549: 5544: 5543: 5539: 5529: 5527: 5516: 5515: 5511: 5501: 5499: 5488: 5487: 5483: 5473: 5471: 5460: 5456: 5455: 5448: 5438: 5436: 5427: 5426: 5422: 5416:Wayback Machine 5407: 5403: 5397:Wayback Machine 5388: 5384: 5374: 5372: 5359: 5358: 5354: 5344: 5342: 5338: 5337: 5333: 5323: 5321: 5320:. April 2, 2014 5313: 5309: 5308: 5304: 5294: 5292: 5283: 5282: 5278: 5269: 5268: 5264: 5255: 5251: 5234: 5230: 5215: 5214: 5210: 5205: 5201: 5191: 5189: 5177: 5176: 5172: 5167: 5163: 5118:Wood, Abby K.; 5117: 5116: 5112: 5105: 5084: 5083: 5079: 5071: 5067: 5050: 5038: 5020: 5019: 5015: 5005: 5004: 5000: 4990: 4988: 4979: 4978: 4963: 4954: 4950: 4940: 4938: 4927:opensecrets.org 4921: 4920: 4916: 4908: 4904: 4894: 4892: 4883: 4882: 4878: 4832: 4831: 4827: 4818: 4817: 4813: 4808:Wayback Machine 4798: 4794: 4784: 4782: 4771: 4770: 4766: 4756: 4754: 4744: 4740: 4739: 4735: 4725: 4723: 4717: 4716: 4712: 4700: 4696: 4686: 4684: 4670: 4669: 4665: 4655: 4653: 4645: 4644: 4640: 4630: 4628: 4615: 4614: 4610: 4598: 4594: 4580: 4576: 4566:Wayback Machine 4557: 4553: 4543: 4541: 4527: 4526: 4522: 4507: 4503: 4493: 4491: 4482: 4481: 4477: 4467: 4465: 4461: 4460: 4456: 4446: 4444: 4439: 4438: 4431: 4423: 4419: 4411: 4407: 4399: 4395: 4388: 4378: 4377: 4373: 4363: 4362: 4358: 4343: 4330: 4329: 4322: 4309: 4305: 4292: 4288: 4278: 4274: 4264: 4262: 4260:Washington Post 4253: 4252: 4248: 4238: 4236: 4227: 4226: 4222: 4212: 4210: 4200:Washington Post 4193: 4192: 4188: 4175: 4174: 4170: 4161: 4157: 4147: 4145: 4136: 4135: 4131: 4121: 4119: 4115: 4108: 4107: 4103: 4093: 4091: 4082: 4081: 4077: 4027: 4022: 4021: 4017: 3977: 3972: 3971: 3967: 3957: 3955: 3945: 3944: 3940: 3932: 3928: 3918: 3916: 3906: 3904: 3900: 3894: 3893: 3889: 3877: 3876: 3872: 3862: 3860: 3858: 3843: 3842: 3838: 3828: 3826: 3821: 3820: 3816: 3806: 3804: 3799: 3798: 3794: 3789: 3785: 3775: 3773: 3768: 3767: 3760: 3750: 3748: 3743: 3742: 3733: 3723: 3721: 3711: 3710: 3706: 3696: 3694: 3689: 3688: 3684: 3674: 3672: 3667: 3666: 3655: 3645: 3643: 3633: 3632: 3625: 3615: 3613: 3611: 3596: 3595: 3591: 3582: 3581: 3572: 3562: 3560: 3552: 3551: 3542: 3532: 3530: 3521: 3520: 3516: 3506: 3504: 3495: 3494: 3490: 3480: 3478: 3471: 3466: 3465: 3461: 3451: 3449: 3420: 3419: 3415: 3405: 3403: 3397: 3396: 3387: 3377: 3375: 3346: 3345: 3341: 3303: 3302: 3298: 3262: 3261: 3257: 3221: 3220: 3216: 3209: 3192: 3191: 3187: 3177: 3175: 3166: 3165: 3161: 3151: 3149: 3138: 3137: 3133: 3122:OpenSecrets.org 3116: 3115: 3111: 3101: 3099: 3097:OpenSecrets.org 3091: 3090: 3086: 3076: 3074: 3066: 3065: 3061: 3051: 3049: 3041: 3040: 3036: 3026: 3024: 3015: 3014: 3001: 2988: 2987: 2983: 2973: 2971: 2966: 2958: 2956: 2951: 2950: 2946: 2936: 2934: 2926: 2925: 2921: 2911: 2909: 2899: 2898: 2894: 2884: 2882: 2880: 2865: 2864: 2860: 2850: 2848: 2843: 2842: 2835: 2825: 2823: 2815: 2814: 2807: 2797: 2795: 2787: 2786: 2782: 2773: 2772: 2768: 2762: 2761: 2754: 2744: 2742: 2738: 2730: 2729: 2722: 2713: 2712: 2708: 2698: 2696: 2694:how stuff works 2687: 2686: 2673: 2663: 2661: 2655: 2654: 2647: 2637: 2635: 2626: 2625: 2618: 2608: 2606: 2600: 2599: 2590: 2580: 2578: 2569: 2568: 2564: 2554: 2552: 2544: 2543: 2539: 2529: 2527: 2522: 2512: 2504:McCusker, J. J. 2502: 2492: 2484:McCusker, J. J. 2482: 2480: 2473: 2468: 2463: 2462: 2456: 2452: 2412: 2408: 2403: 2399: 2394: 2390: 2385: 2314: 2191: 2189:Sources of data 2169: 2090: 2040:Martin O'Malley 2016:Americans Elect 1969:Hillary Clinton 1941: 1922: 1916: 1902: 1888:Citizens United 1883:Citizens United 1866:Citizens United 1853:Citizens United 1833: 1811: 1805: 1633: 1627: 1618: 1604: 1587:First Amendment 1556: 1522: 1516: 1467: 1459: 1432: 1426: 1393: 1377: 1368: 1331: 1325: 1316: 1310: 1305: 1255:Leadership PACs 1223: 1217: 1202: 1147: 1138: 1132: 1097: 1088: 1083: 1082: 1077: 1073: 1068: 1053: 1047: 1043: 1030: 1026: 1019:Table footnotes 1001: 996: 981: 976: 966: 961: 956: 954: 949: 944: 931: 926: 921: 916: 911: 893: 888: 878: 873: 868: 866: 861: 856: 837: 813: 771: 746: 741: 701: 663: 657: 627: 608: 599: 598: 592: 586: 582: 581: 580: 577: 574: 571: 568: 565: 562: 559: 556: 553: 550: 547: 543: 542: 539: 536: 533: 530: 527: 524: 521: 518: 515: 482: 462: 457: 450: 449: 448: 442: 437: 424: 420: 338:Self-Financing 334: 329: 324: 319: 277: 276: 270: 264: 260: 259: 258: 255: 252: 249: 246: 243: 240: 237: 234: 231: 228: 225: 222: 218: 217: 214: 211: 208: 177: 157: 59:happens at the 43:Diagram by the 35: 28: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 6732: 6730: 6722: 6721: 6716: 6711: 6701: 6700: 6694: 6693: 6691: 6690: 6684: 6682: 6678: 6677: 6675: 6674: 6669: 6664: 6659: 6658: 6657: 6652: 6642: 6637: 6632: 6624: 6619: 6614: 6613: 6612: 6607: 6602: 6591: 6589: 6587:ethnic lobbies 6579: 6578: 6576: 6575: 6570: 6565: 6560: 6555: 6550: 6548:Foreign policy 6545: 6540: 6535: 6530: 6525: 6523:Administration 6519: 6517: 6513: 6512: 6510: 6509: 6507:Transportation 6504: 6499: 6494: 6492:Pharmaceutical 6489: 6484: 6479: 6474: 6469: 6463: 6461: 6457: 6456: 6454: 6453: 6448: 6438: 6433: 6432: 6431: 6421: 6415: 6413: 6409: 6408: 6403: 6400: 6399: 6394: 6392: 6391: 6384: 6377: 6369: 6363: 6362: 6357: 6347: 6341: 6322: 6311: 6308:Democracy Now! 6300: 6288: 6283: 6281:Public Citizen 6278: 6273: 6268: 6263: 6258: 6253: 6248: 6243: 6238: 6230: 6229: 6184:external links 6179: 6177: 6170: 6164: 6163:External links 6161: 6160: 6159: 6152: 6146: 6129: 6123: 6108: 6102: 6089: 6083: 6061: 6055: 6038: 6021: 6001: 5990: 5987: 5984: 5983: 5961: 5939: 5921: 5908:"Personal use" 5899: 5877: 5863: 5835: 5817: 5788: 5762: 5744: 5723: 5699: 5672: 5639: 5613: 5582: 5559: 5537: 5509: 5481: 5446: 5420: 5401: 5382: 5371:. May 14, 2004 5352: 5331: 5302: 5276: 5262: 5249: 5228: 5208: 5199: 5170: 5161: 5134:(2): 516–534. 5110: 5103: 5077: 5065: 5036: 5013: 5010:. p. 229. 4998: 4961: 4948: 4914: 4902: 4876: 4825: 4811: 4792: 4764: 4733: 4710: 4694: 4663: 4638: 4608: 4592: 4574: 4551: 4520: 4501: 4475: 4454: 4443:. Open Secrets 4429: 4417: 4405: 4386: 4371: 4356: 4341: 4320: 4303: 4286: 4272: 4246: 4220: 4186: 4168: 4155: 4129: 4101: 4075: 4015: 3965: 3938: 3926: 3898: 3887: 3870: 3856: 3836: 3814: 3792: 3783: 3758: 3731: 3704: 3682: 3653: 3623: 3609: 3589: 3570: 3540: 3514: 3488: 3459: 3433:(4): 893–909. 3413: 3385: 3365:10.1086/707307 3359:(3): 844–858. 3339: 3318:10.1086/686615 3312:(4): 974–988. 3296: 3275:(4): 761–778. 3255: 3234:(3): 545–558. 3214: 3207: 3185: 3159: 3131: 3109: 3084: 3059: 3043:"Introduction" 3034: 2999: 2981: 2944: 2919: 2892: 2878: 2858: 2833: 2805: 2780: 2766: 2752: 2720: 2706: 2671: 2645: 2634:. May 14, 2018 2616: 2588: 2562: 2537: 2521:1800–present: 2470: 2469: 2467: 2464: 2461: 2460: 2450: 2435: 2434: 2428: 2427: 2422: 2421: 2406: 2397: 2387: 2386: 2384: 2381: 2380: 2379: 2374: 2369: 2364: 2359: 2354: 2349: 2342: 2337: 2332: 2327: 2322: 2313: 2310: 2304: 2303: 2301: 2299: 2293: 2289: 2288: 2275: 2273: 2240: 2236: 2235: 2230: 2219: 2214: 2210: 2209: 2206: 2203: 2200: 2190: 2187: 2168: 2165: 2124:Proposition 89 2089: 2086: 2034:(the eventual 2030:nominee), and 2026:(the eventual 2022:nominations), 1995:and Democrats 1957:George W. Bush 1940: 1937: 1915: 1912: 1901: 1896: 1832: 1823: 1807:Main article: 1804: 1798: 1769:. However, in 1743: 1742: 1741:421.3 million 1739: 1736: 1733: 1730: 1727: 1723: 1722: 1721:221.7 million 1719: 1716: 1713: 1710: 1707: 1701: 1700: 1699:199.6 million 1697: 1694: 1691: 1688: 1685: 1679: 1678: 1675: 1672: 1669: 1666: 1663: 1629:Main article: 1626: 1623: 1617: 1614: 1603: 1600: 1555: 1550: 1534:Vice President 1518:Main article: 1515: 1512: 1471:South Carolina 1466: 1463: 1458: 1455: 1435:Andrew Jackson 1425: 1422: 1414: 1413: 1410: 1407: 1404: 1392: 1389: 1376: 1373: 1367: 1364: 1327:Main article: 1324: 1321: 1312:Main article: 1309: 1306: 1301:Main article: 1299: 1298: 1292: 1286:, the Federal 1262: 1252: 1246: 1230:Connected PACs 1219:Main article: 1216: 1213: 1201: 1198: 1189: 1188: 1185: 1182: 1146: 1143: 1134:Main article: 1131: 1128: 1109:George W. Bush 1096: 1093: 1087: 1084: 1081: 1080: 1071: 1051: 1041: 1023: 1022: 1014: 1013: 1006: 1005: 1003: 998: 993: 989: 988: 986: 983: 978: 973: 969: 968: 963: 958: 951: 946: 941: 934: 933: 928: 923: 918: 913: 908: 901: 900: 898: 895: 890: 885: 881: 880: 875: 870: 863: 858: 853: 849: 848: 845: 842: 839: 834: 830: 829: 826: 812: 809: 770: 767: 766: 765: 762: 756: 753: 745: 742: 740: 737: 700: 697: 696: 695: 688: 684: 676: 675: 656: 653: 652: 651: 644: 640: 637: 634: 626: 623: 617:New York Times 607: 604: 597: 596: 590: 583: 578: 575: 572: 569: 566: 563: 560: 557: 554: 551: 548: 545: 544: 540: 537: 534: 531: 528: 525: 522: 519: 516: 513: 512: 511: 510: 509: 508: 507: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 481: 478: 461: 458: 456: 453: 443: 439: 438: 427: 425: 418: 413: 412: 411: 408: 407: 404: 401: 398: 395: 391: 390: 387: 384: 381: 378: 374: 373: 370: 367: 364: 361: 357: 356: 353: 350: 347: 344: 340: 339: 336: 331: 326: 321: 309: 308: 297:Watergate days 275: 274: 268: 261: 256: 253: 250: 247: 244: 241: 238: 235: 232: 229: 226: 223: 220: 219: 215: 212: 209: 206: 205: 204: 203: 202: 201: 200: 199: 198: 197: 196: 195: 190: 176: 173: 172: 171: 168: 164: 161: 156: 153: 91:, especially " 26: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 6731: 6720: 6717: 6715: 6712: 6710: 6707: 6706: 6704: 6689: 6686: 6685: 6683: 6679: 6673: 6670: 6668: 6665: 6663: 6660: 6656: 6653: 6651: 6648: 6647: 6646: 6643: 6641: 6638: 6636: 6633: 6630:(Anti Castro) 6628: 6625: 6623: 6620: 6618: 6615: 6611: 6608: 6606: 6603: 6601: 6598: 6597: 6596: 6593: 6592: 6590: 6588: 6584: 6580: 6574: 6571: 6569: 6566: 6564: 6561: 6559: 6556: 6554: 6551: 6549: 6546: 6544: 6541: 6539: 6536: 6534: 6533:Environmental 6531: 6529: 6526: 6524: 6521: 6520: 6518: 6514: 6508: 6505: 6503: 6500: 6498: 6495: 6493: 6490: 6488: 6485: 6483: 6480: 6478: 6475: 6473: 6470: 6468: 6465: 6464: 6462: 6458: 6452: 6449: 6446: 6442: 6439: 6437: 6434: 6430: 6427: 6426: 6425: 6422: 6420: 6417: 6416: 6414: 6410: 6406: 6401: 6397: 6390: 6385: 6383: 6378: 6376: 6371: 6370: 6367: 6361: 6360:Move to Amend 6358: 6355: 6351: 6348: 6345: 6342: 6337: 6333: 6332: 6327: 6323: 6321: 6320: 6319:FactCheck.org 6315: 6312: 6310: 6309: 6304: 6301: 6299: 6295: 6292: 6289: 6287: 6284: 6282: 6279: 6277: 6274: 6272: 6269: 6267: 6264: 6262: 6259: 6257: 6254: 6252: 6249: 6247: 6244: 6242: 6239: 6237: 6234: 6233: 6226: 6223: 6215: 6205: 6201: 6200:inappropriate 6197: 6193: 6187: 6185: 6178: 6169: 6168: 6162: 6157: 6153: 6149: 6143: 6138: 6137: 6130: 6126: 6120: 6116: 6115: 6109: 6105: 6099: 6095: 6090: 6086: 6080: 6076: 6075:Belknap Press 6072: 6071: 6066: 6062: 6058: 6052: 6047: 6046: 6039: 6035: 6031: 6027: 6022: 6010: 6006: 6002: 5998: 5993: 5992: 5988: 5971: 5965: 5962: 5949: 5943: 5940: 5935: 5931: 5930:"OpenSecrets" 5925: 5922: 5909: 5903: 5900: 5887: 5881: 5878: 5873: 5867: 5864: 5852: 5851: 5850:Seattle Times 5846: 5839: 5836: 5831: 5827: 5821: 5818: 5805: 5798: 5792: 5789: 5776: 5772: 5766: 5763: 5758: 5754: 5748: 5745: 5733: 5727: 5724: 5709: 5703: 5700: 5688: 5687: 5682: 5676: 5673: 5660: 5653: 5649: 5643: 5640: 5627: 5623: 5617: 5614: 5602: 5601: 5596: 5589: 5587: 5583: 5570: 5563: 5560: 5547: 5541: 5538: 5526: 5525: 5520: 5513: 5510: 5498: 5497: 5492: 5485: 5482: 5470: 5466: 5459: 5453: 5451: 5447: 5434: 5430: 5424: 5421: 5417: 5413: 5410: 5405: 5402: 5398: 5394: 5391: 5386: 5383: 5370: 5366: 5362: 5356: 5353: 5341: 5335: 5332: 5319: 5312: 5306: 5303: 5291: 5287: 5280: 5277: 5272: 5266: 5263: 5259: 5253: 5250: 5245: 5239: 5231: 5225: 5221: 5220: 5212: 5209: 5203: 5200: 5188: 5184: 5180: 5174: 5171: 5165: 5162: 5157: 5153: 5149: 5145: 5141: 5137: 5133: 5129: 5125: 5121: 5114: 5111: 5106: 5104:0-8173-1301-X 5100: 5096: 5091: 5090: 5081: 5078: 5074: 5069: 5066: 5061: 5055: 5047: 5043: 5039: 5033: 5029: 5028: 5023: 5017: 5014: 5009: 5002: 4999: 4987: 4983: 4976: 4974: 4972: 4970: 4968: 4966: 4962: 4958: 4952: 4949: 4936: 4932: 4928: 4924: 4918: 4915: 4912: 4906: 4903: 4891: 4887: 4880: 4877: 4872: 4868: 4864: 4860: 4855: 4850: 4846: 4842: 4841: 4836: 4829: 4826: 4821: 4815: 4812: 4809: 4805: 4802: 4796: 4793: 4781: 4780: 4775: 4768: 4765: 4752: 4751: 4743: 4737: 4734: 4721: 4714: 4711: 4707: 4703: 4698: 4695: 4683: 4682: 4677: 4673: 4672:Cordes, Nancy 4667: 4664: 4652: 4648: 4642: 4639: 4626: 4622: 4618: 4612: 4609: 4605: 4601: 4596: 4593: 4589: 4588: 4583: 4578: 4575: 4571: 4567: 4563: 4560: 4555: 4552: 4539: 4535: 4531: 4524: 4521: 4517: 4516: 4511: 4505: 4502: 4489: 4485: 4479: 4476: 4464: 4458: 4455: 4442: 4436: 4434: 4430: 4426: 4421: 4418: 4415: 4409: 4406: 4403: 4393: 4391: 4387: 4382: 4375: 4372: 4367: 4360: 4357: 4352: 4348: 4344: 4342:9781412980401 4338: 4334: 4327: 4325: 4321: 4317: 4316:0-87840-905-X 4313: 4307: 4304: 4300: 4296: 4290: 4287: 4283: 4276: 4273: 4261: 4257: 4250: 4247: 4235: 4231: 4224: 4221: 4209: 4205: 4201: 4197: 4190: 4187: 4182: 4178: 4172: 4169: 4165: 4159: 4156: 4143: 4139: 4133: 4130: 4114: 4113: 4105: 4102: 4090: 4086: 4079: 4076: 4071: 4067: 4063: 4059: 4054: 4053:11577/3235824 4049: 4045: 4041: 4037: 4033: 4026: 4019: 4016: 4011: 4007: 4003: 3999: 3995: 3991: 3987: 3983: 3976: 3969: 3966: 3953: 3949: 3942: 3939: 3936: 3930: 3927: 3914: 3910: 3902: 3899: 3891: 3888: 3883: 3882: 3874: 3871: 3859: 3857:9780385535601 3853: 3849: 3848: 3840: 3837: 3824: 3818: 3815: 3802: 3796: 3793: 3787: 3784: 3771: 3765: 3763: 3759: 3746: 3740: 3738: 3736: 3732: 3719: 3715: 3708: 3705: 3692: 3686: 3683: 3671: 3664: 3662: 3660: 3658: 3654: 3641: 3637: 3630: 3628: 3624: 3612: 3606: 3602: 3601: 3593: 3590: 3585: 3579: 3577: 3575: 3571: 3559: 3555: 3549: 3547: 3545: 3541: 3529: 3525: 3518: 3515: 3503: 3499: 3492: 3489: 3477: 3470: 3463: 3460: 3448: 3444: 3440: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3424: 3417: 3414: 3401: 3394: 3392: 3390: 3386: 3374: 3370: 3366: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3350: 3343: 3340: 3335: 3331: 3327: 3323: 3319: 3315: 3311: 3307: 3300: 3297: 3292: 3288: 3283: 3278: 3274: 3270: 3266: 3259: 3256: 3251: 3247: 3242: 3237: 3233: 3229: 3225: 3218: 3215: 3210: 3204: 3199: 3198: 3189: 3186: 3173: 3169: 3163: 3160: 3148: 3147: 3142: 3135: 3132: 3127: 3123: 3119: 3113: 3110: 3098: 3094: 3088: 3085: 3073: 3069: 3063: 3060: 3048: 3044: 3038: 3035: 3023: 3019: 3012: 3010: 3008: 3006: 3004: 3000: 2995: 2991: 2985: 2982: 2970:. OpenSecrets 2969: 2955:. OpenSecrets 2954: 2948: 2945: 2933: 2929: 2923: 2920: 2907: 2903: 2896: 2893: 2881: 2879:9780385535601 2875: 2871: 2870: 2862: 2859: 2847:. OpenSecrets 2846: 2840: 2838: 2834: 2822: 2818: 2812: 2810: 2806: 2794: 2790: 2784: 2781: 2776: 2770: 2767: 2759: 2757: 2753: 2737: 2734:(June 2021). 2733: 2727: 2725: 2721: 2716: 2710: 2707: 2695: 2691: 2684: 2682: 2680: 2678: 2676: 2672: 2659: 2652: 2650: 2646: 2633: 2629: 2623: 2621: 2617: 2604: 2597: 2595: 2593: 2589: 2577: 2573: 2566: 2563: 2551: 2547: 2541: 2538: 2526: 2518: 2511: 2510: 2505: 2498: 2491: 2490: 2485: 2478: 2476: 2472: 2465: 2454: 2451: 2447: 2443: 2439: 2432: 2431: 2425: 2424: 2419: 2418: 2415: 2410: 2407: 2401: 2398: 2392: 2389: 2382: 2378: 2375: 2373: 2370: 2368: 2365: 2363: 2360: 2358: 2355: 2353: 2350: 2348: 2347: 2343: 2341: 2338: 2336: 2333: 2331: 2328: 2326: 2323: 2321: 2320: 2316: 2315: 2311: 2309: 2302: 2300: 2297: 2294: 2291: 2290: 2287: 2283: 2279: 2276: 2274: 2272: 2270: 2266: 2261: 2259: 2255: 2251: 2247: 2245: 2241: 2238: 2237: 2234: 2231: 2229: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2218: 2215: 2212: 2211: 2207: 2204: 2201: 2198: 2197: 2194:Type of data 2188: 2185: 2180: 2176: 2174: 2166: 2164: 2161: 2157: 2153: 2149: 2147: 2142: 2141: 2136: 2135: 2129: 2125: 2120: 2117: 2115: 2111: 2107: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2087: 2085: 2082: 2077: 2075: 2069: 2067: 2062: 2060: 2056: 2051: 2047: 2045: 2044:Steve Bullock 2041: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2008: 2006: 2002: 1998: 1994: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1981:Rudy Giuliani 1978: 1974: 1970: 1966: 1962: 1958: 1954: 1949: 1945: 1938: 1936: 1934: 1929: 1928: 1921: 1913: 1911: 1909: 1908: 1900: 1897: 1895: 1893: 1889: 1884: 1880: 1875: 1873: 1872: 1867: 1863: 1859: 1854: 1850: 1848: 1844: 1840: 1839: 1831: 1827: 1824: 1822: 1820: 1816: 1810: 1802: 1799: 1797: 1795: 1794:2004 campaign 1791: 1787: 1783: 1779: 1774: 1772: 1768: 1767: 1761: 1759: 1754: 1750: 1740: 1738:487.4 million 1737: 1735:224.4 million 1734: 1732:263.5 million 1731: 1729:105.1 million 1728: 1725: 1724: 1720: 1718:244.4 million 1717: 1715:131.6 million 1714: 1712:141.2 million 1711: 1708: 1706: 1703: 1702: 1698: 1695: 1692: 1690:122.3 million 1689: 1686: 1684: 1681: 1680: 1676: 1673: 1670: 1667: 1664: 1661: 1660: 1657: 1656: 1652: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1638: 1632: 1624: 1622: 1621:competitive. 1615: 1613: 1610: 1601: 1599: 1597: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1579: 1575: 1571: 1570: 1565: 1561: 1554: 1551: 1549: 1547: 1543: 1539: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1521: 1513: 1511: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1497: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1480: 1476: 1472: 1464: 1462: 1456: 1454: 1452: 1448: 1443: 1439: 1436: 1431: 1423: 1421: 1417: 1411: 1408: 1405: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1398: 1390: 1388: 1386: 1381: 1374: 1372: 1365: 1363: 1360: 1356: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1336: 1330: 1322: 1320: 1315: 1307: 1304: 1296: 1293: 1289: 1285: 1281: 1280: 1275: 1270: 1266: 1263: 1260: 1256: 1253: 1250: 1247: 1243: 1239: 1235: 1231: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1222: 1214: 1211: 1206: 1199: 1197: 1195: 1186: 1183: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1176: 1171: 1169: 1163: 1159: 1156: 1152: 1144: 1142: 1137: 1129: 1127: 1124: 1122: 1121:2008 campaign 1119:. During the 1118: 1114: 1110: 1106: 1105:Bush Pioneers 1101: 1094: 1092: 1085: 1075: 1072: 1066: 1064: 1062: 1060: 1058: 1056: 1052: 1045: 1042: 1038: 1034: 1028: 1025: 1021: 1020: 1011: 1007: 1004: 999: 994: 991: 990: 987: 979: 974: 971: 970: 964: 959: 952: 947: 942: 939: 936: 935: 929: 924: 919: 914: 909: 906: 903: 902: 899: 891: 886: 883: 882: 876: 871: 864: 859: 854: 851: 850: 846: 843: 840: 835: 832: 831: 823: 820: 818: 810: 808: 805: 799: 795: 791: 789: 784: 775: 768: 763: 760: 757: 754: 751: 750: 749: 743: 738: 735: 731: 728: 726: 720: 718: 714: 710: 706: 698: 693: 689: 685: 681: 680: 679: 673: 669: 665: 664: 662: 654: 649: 645: 641: 638: 635: 632: 631: 630: 624: 622: 619: 618: 612: 605: 603: 591: 585: 584: 501: 498: 497: 496: 495: 494: 493: 492: 491: 490: 488: 479: 477: 474: 469: 468: 459: 454: 452: 446: 435: 434:MediaWiki.org 431: 426: 417: 416: 405: 402: 399: 396: 393: 392: 388: 385: 382: 379: 376: 375: 371: 368: 365: 362: 359: 358: 354: 351: 348: 345: 342: 341: 337: 332: 327: 322: 317: 316: 313: 306: 305: 304: 302: 298: 294: 290: 286: 282: 269: 263: 262: 191: 188: 187: 186: 185: 184: 183: 182: 181: 180: 174: 169: 165: 162: 159: 158: 154: 152: 148: 146: 142: 138: 134: 130: 126: 122: 118: 114: 109: 106: 100: 98: 94: 90: 86: 85: 78: 75: 70: 66: 62: 58: 57:United States 54: 46: 41: 37: 33: 19: 6650:Jewish lobby 6610:Saudi Arabia 6467:Agricultural 6440: 6354:Retro Report 6330: 6317: 6306: 6276:Common Cause 6218: 6212:January 2024 6209: 6194:by removing 6181: 6135: 6113: 6093: 6069: 6044: 6025: 6013:. Retrieved 6009:the original 5996: 5976:December 10, 5974:. Retrieved 5964: 5954:December 10, 5952:. Retrieved 5942: 5924: 5914:November 24, 5912:. Retrieved 5902: 5892:November 24, 5890:. Retrieved 5880: 5866: 5856:December 10, 5854:. Retrieved 5848: 5838: 5830:www.wbur.org 5829: 5820: 5808:. Retrieved 5803: 5791: 5779:. Retrieved 5775:the original 5765: 5757:the original 5747: 5735:. Retrieved 5726: 5714:. Retrieved 5702: 5690:. Retrieved 5684: 5675: 5663:. Retrieved 5661:. p. 17 5658: 5642: 5630:. Retrieved 5625: 5616: 5604:. Retrieved 5598: 5573:. Retrieved 5562: 5550:. Retrieved 5540: 5528:. Retrieved 5522: 5512: 5500:. Retrieved 5494: 5484: 5472:. Retrieved 5464: 5437:. Retrieved 5433:the original 5429:"Biden cert" 5423: 5404: 5385: 5373:. Retrieved 5364: 5355: 5343:. Retrieved 5334: 5322:. Retrieved 5317: 5305: 5295:February 19, 5293:. Retrieved 5289: 5279: 5265: 5252: 5218: 5211: 5202: 5190:. Retrieved 5182: 5173: 5164: 5131: 5127: 5113: 5088: 5080: 5068: 5026: 5016: 5007: 5001: 4989:. Retrieved 4986:Open Secrets 4985: 4951: 4939:. Retrieved 4935:the original 4926: 4917: 4905: 4893:. Retrieved 4889: 4879: 4847:(1): 11–27. 4844: 4838: 4828: 4814: 4795: 4785:December 10, 4783:. Retrieved 4777: 4767: 4757:December 10, 4755:. Retrieved 4748: 4736: 4724:. Retrieved 4713: 4705: 4697: 4685:. Retrieved 4679: 4666: 4654:. Retrieved 4651:Open Secrets 4650: 4647:"Super PACs" 4641: 4629:. Retrieved 4625:the original 4611: 4595: 4585: 4577: 4554: 4544:December 10, 4542:. Retrieved 4538:the original 4523: 4513: 4504: 4492:. Retrieved 4488:the original 4478: 4466:. Retrieved 4457: 4445:. Retrieved 4420: 4408: 4380: 4374: 4365: 4359: 4332: 4306: 4289: 4275: 4263:. Retrieved 4259: 4249: 4237:. Retrieved 4233: 4223: 4211:. Retrieved 4199: 4189: 4180: 4171: 4158: 4146:. Retrieved 4132: 4122:February 12, 4120:. Retrieved 4111: 4104: 4094:February 12, 4092:. Retrieved 4088: 4078: 4035: 4031: 4018: 3985: 3981: 3968: 3958:November 25, 3956:. Retrieved 3951: 3941: 3929: 3917:. Retrieved 3912: 3901: 3890: 3880: 3873: 3863:December 30, 3861:. Retrieved 3846: 3839: 3827:. Retrieved 3817: 3805:. Retrieved 3795: 3786: 3774:. Retrieved 3751:November 26, 3749:. Retrieved 3722:. Retrieved 3717: 3707: 3695:. Retrieved 3685: 3673:. Retrieved 3644:. Retrieved 3639: 3614:. Retrieved 3599: 3592: 3561:. Retrieved 3558:Open Secrets 3557: 3531:. Retrieved 3527: 3517: 3507:November 26, 3505:. Retrieved 3501: 3491: 3479:. Retrieved 3475: 3462: 3450:. Retrieved 3430: 3426: 3416: 3404:. Retrieved 3378:November 26, 3376:. Retrieved 3356: 3352: 3342: 3309: 3305: 3299: 3272: 3268: 3258: 3231: 3227: 3217: 3196: 3188: 3176:. Retrieved 3172:the original 3162: 3150:. Retrieved 3144: 3134: 3126:the original 3121: 3112: 3100:. Retrieved 3096: 3087: 3075:. Retrieved 3071: 3062: 3050:. Retrieved 3047:Open Secrets 3046: 3037: 3025:. Retrieved 3022:Open Secrets 3021: 2984: 2972:. Retrieved 2957:. Retrieved 2947: 2935:. Retrieved 2932:open secrets 2931: 2922: 2910:. Retrieved 2905: 2895: 2885:December 17, 2883:. Retrieved 2868: 2861: 2849:. Retrieved 2826:December 30, 2824:. Retrieved 2821:Open Secrets 2820: 2798:December 30, 2796:. Retrieved 2793:Open Secrets 2792: 2783: 2769: 2743:. Retrieved 2709: 2699:November 25, 2697:. Retrieved 2693: 2662:. Retrieved 2636:. Retrieved 2631: 2607:. Retrieved 2579:. Retrieved 2575: 2565: 2553:. Retrieved 2549: 2540: 2530:February 29, 2528:. Retrieved 2508: 2488: 2453: 2442:Barack Obama 2413: 2409: 2400: 2391: 2344: 2335:DISCLOSE Act 2317: 2307: 2262: 2248: 2242: 2221: 2182: 2177: 2170: 2154: 2150: 2145: 2138: 2132: 2121: 2118: 2091: 2078: 2070: 2063: 2055:Barack Obama 2052: 2048: 2024:Gary Johnson 2020:Reform Party 2012:Buddy Roemer 2009: 2005:John Edwards 1993:Tom Tancredo 1973:Barack Obama 1953:Steve Forbes 1950: 1946: 1942: 1925: 1923: 1905: 1903: 1898: 1891: 1887: 1882: 1878: 1876: 1869: 1865: 1857: 1852: 1851: 1842: 1836: 1834: 1829: 1825: 1818: 1814: 1812: 1800: 1775: 1770: 1764: 1762: 1746: 1709:59.5 million 1693:92.8 million 1687:45.6 million 1654: 1653: 1644: 1634: 1619: 1605: 1595: 1590: 1573: 1567: 1557: 1552: 1523: 1508:labor unions 1468: 1460: 1444: 1440: 1433: 1418: 1415: 1394: 1382: 1378: 1369: 1338: 1334: 1332: 1317: 1294: 1283: 1277: 1265:"Super PACs" 1264: 1254: 1248: 1242:labor unions 1238:corporations 1229: 1224: 1208: 1203: 1190: 1172: 1164: 1160: 1154: 1150: 1148: 1139: 1125: 1102: 1098: 1089: 1074: 1044: 1027: 1018: 1017: 1009: 997:per election 977:per election 945:per election 912:per election 889:per election 857:per election 814: 800: 796: 792: 783:Billionaires 780: 747: 733: 729: 721: 702: 677: 648:rent-seeking 628: 615: 613: 609: 600: 499: 483: 472: 465: 463: 451: 444: 330:Contributors 325:Contributors 310: 278: 178: 149: 133:Common Cause 110: 104: 101: 82: 79: 69:local levels 50: 36: 6558:Immigration 6241:OpenSecrets 5934:OpenSecrets 5810:November 1, 5737:January 13, 5716:February 1, 5692:January 13, 5665:December 1, 5632:December 1, 5606:December 1, 5571:. Bloomberg 5552:February 1, 5530:December 1, 5502:December 1, 5474:December 1, 5439:February 1, 5375:December 1, 5345:January 13, 5324:November 1, 5192:January 13, 5022:Sides, John 4991:November 4, 4931:OpenSecrets 4726:October 29, 4656:October 29, 4621:OpenSecrets 4604:OpenSecrets 4494:January 13, 4468:January 13, 4447:November 2, 4164:FEC website 4148:January 13, 3988:(1): 3–29. 3919:October 31, 3829:December 3, 3807:December 3, 3776:December 3, 3724:November 1, 3697:December 3, 3675:November 1, 3646:October 31, 3616:October 27, 3563:December 4, 3533:December 4, 3481:November 1, 3452:November 1, 3406:October 30, 3178:January 13, 3152:January 13, 3077:December 7, 3072:OpenSecrets 3052:October 29, 3027:October 29, 2994:OpenSecrets 2974:December 5, 2959:January 29, 2937:January 13, 2912:November 4, 2851:December 7, 2745:November 4, 2664:October 27, 2638:October 29, 2609:October 27, 2581:October 27, 2550:OpenSecrets 2501:1700–1799: 2481:1634–1699: 2446:John McCain 2352:Money trail 2244:OpenSecrets 2223:OpenSecrets 2217:OpenSecrets 2106:Connecticut 2059:Mitt Romney 2036:Green Party 2028:Libertarian 1985:Mitt Romney 1977:John McCain 1965:Howard Dean 1696:243 million 1609:eight words 1583:free speech 1572:(1976). In 1502:(1943) and 1475:Ben Tillman 1385:OpenSecrets 1166:political " 852:Individual 828:RECIPIENTS 781:Money from 717:Big Brother 705:Betsy DeVos 606:State level 487:OpenSecrets 430:Phabricator 108:politics". 6703:Categories 6429:Hybrid PAC 5046:1027769548 4895:August 12, 4687:August 11, 4534:ProPublica 3528:New Yorker 2466:References 2286:California 2258:California 2032:Jill Stein 1997:Chris Dodd 1961:John Kerry 1918:See also: 1786:MoveOn.org 1677:2001–2002 1641:soft money 1585:under the 1447:Mark Hanna 1397:dark money 1355:Super PACs 1303:Hybrid PAC 1295:Hybrid PAC 1236:prohibits 1155:soft money 1151:hard money 1037:Super PACs 957:(combined) 869:(combined) 817:hard money 335:Committees 281:Jane Mayer 119:(FEC), an 93:Super PACs 6482:Insurance 6346:(archive) 6196:excessive 6015:August 3, 5781:March 21, 5686:USA Today 5575:April 26, 5290:USA Today 5238:cite book 5156:244438764 5148:1540-5907 5054:cite book 4941:March 10, 4871:157535446 4863:1550-3585 4351:746832550 4208:0190-8286 4070:157239329 4062:1465-7295 4002:0190-9320 3334:156903560 3326:0022-3816 3291:1053-1858 3250:1540-5907 2965:See also 2741:. Updated 2555:March 12, 2430:million. 2282:Wisconsin 2254:Wisconsin 2001:Joe Biden 1892:SpeechNow 1879:SpeechNow 1771:McConnell 1674:1999–2000 1671:1997–1998 1668:1995–1996 1665:1993–1994 1339:527 group 965:$ 106,500 877:$ 106,500 725:Watergate 692:Ann Ravel 625:Criticism 293:Watergate 145:primaries 6681:See also 6662:Pakistan 6583:Diaspora 6568:Retirees 6543:Feminism 6528:Abortion 6497:Software 6294:Archived 6067:(2014). 5650:(1981). 5496:The Hill 5412:Archived 5393:Archived 5122:(2021). 5024:(2018). 4804:Archived 4779:Politico 4681:CBS News 4631:April 3, 4562:Archived 4265:March 9, 4239:March 9, 4234:The Hill 4213:March 9, 4010:85465395 3447:20647957 3373:11322616 3146:Politico 3102:June 26, 2506:(1992). 2486:(1997). 2312:See also 2296:MapLight 2278:MapLight 2250:MapLight 2233:MapLight 2227:MapLight 2205:lobbying 1989:Ron Paul 1473:Senator 1276:held in 1095:Bundling 1002:per year 982:per year 962:per year 960:$ 35,500 955:per year 953:$ 10,000 950:per year 930:$ 45,000 927:per year 925:$ 15,000 917:per year 894:per year 874:per year 872:$ 35,500 867:per year 865:$ 10,000 862:per year 113:Congress 6640:Ireland 6617:Armenia 6502:Tobacco 6405:History 6190:Please 6182:use of 6034:1422616 5659:FEC.gov 5626:FEC.gov 5465:FEC.gov 5409:FEC.gov 5390:FEC.gov 5365:FEC.gov 5258:FEC.GOV 2576:Reuters 2213:Federal 2208:voting 2156:Seattle 2098:Arizona 1858:Buckley 1591:Buckley 1574:Buckley 1010:Source: 1000:$ 5,000 995:$ 5,000 980:$ 5,000 975:$ 5,000 948:$ 5,000 943:$ 2,800 920:$ 5,000 915:$ 5,000 910:$ 5,000 892:$ 5,000 887:$ 2,000 860:$ 5,000 855:$ 3,000 432:and on 61:federal 55:in the 6667:Turkey 6645:Israel 6635:Greece 6477:Health 6472:Energy 6445:reform 6412:Topics 6144: 6121: 6100: 6081: 6053: 6032: 5226: 5154: 5146: 5101: 5097:–217. 5044: 5034: 4869: 4861: 4753:. 2013 4349: 4339: 4314: 4206: 4068: 4060: 4008: 4000: 3854: 3607: 3445: 3371: 3332: 3324: 3289: 3248: 3205: 2876: 2605:. CNBC 1924:After 1886:under 1803:(2007) 1635:Under 1540:, and 1530:Senate 1528:, the 1488:Senate 1477:, the 1232:: The 1107:" for 825:DONORS 595:Senate 593: 587: 271: 265: 67:, and 6672:Japan 6622:China 6605:Libya 6600:Egypt 6573:Taxes 5800:(PDF) 5711:(PDF) 5655:(PDF) 5600:Money 5461:(XLS) 5314:(PDF) 5152:S2CID 4867:S2CID 4745:(PDF) 4116:(PDF) 4089:Salon 4066:S2CID 4028:(PDF) 4006:S2CID 3978:(PDF) 3472:(PDF) 3443:JSTOR 3369:S2CID 3330:S2CID 2739:(PDF) 2513:(PDF) 2493:(PDF) 2383:Notes 2292:Local 2239:State 2199:level 2102:Maine 1662:Party 1566:case 1526:House 1484:House 802:from 761:, and 406:0.1% 403:11.2% 400:45.7% 397:35.1% 389:0.0% 383:59.3% 380:27.5% 372:0.8% 369:23.1% 363:20.9% 355:2.0% 352:23.4% 349:52.5% 346:19.4% 320:races 65:state 6627:Cuba 6595:Arab 6585:and 6563:LGBT 6553:Guns 6142:ISBN 6119:ISBN 6098:ISBN 6079:ISBN 6051:ISBN 6030:SSRN 6017:2005 5978:2012 5956:2012 5916:2022 5894:2022 5858:2016 5812:2022 5783:2013 5739:2016 5718:2011 5694:2016 5667:2019 5634:2019 5608:2019 5577:2012 5554:2011 5532:2019 5504:2019 5476:2019 5441:2011 5377:2019 5347:2016 5326:2022 5297:2013 5244:link 5224:ISBN 5194:2016 5183:Oyez 5144:ISSN 5099:ISBN 5060:link 5042:OCLC 5032:ISBN 4993:2022 4943:2015 4897:2014 4859:ISSN 4787:2018 4759:2018 4728:2022 4689:2011 4658:2022 4633:2012 4546:2009 4496:2016 4470:2016 4449:2022 4347:OCLC 4337:ISBN 4312:ISBN 4267:2024 4241:2024 4215:2024 4204:ISSN 4150:2016 4124:2023 4096:2023 4058:ISSN 3998:ISSN 3960:2022 3921:2022 3865:2022 3852:ISBN 3831:2022 3809:2022 3778:2022 3753:2022 3726:2022 3720:(27) 3699:2022 3677:2022 3648:2022 3618:2022 3605:ISBN 3565:2022 3535:2022 3509:2022 3483:2022 3454:2022 3408:2022 3380:2022 3322:ISSN 3287:ISSN 3246:ISSN 3203:ISBN 3180:2016 3154:2016 3104:2020 3079:2022 3054:2022 3029:2022 2976:2022 2961:2024 2939:2016 2914:2022 2887:2022 2874:ISBN 2853:2022 2828:2022 2800:2022 2747:2022 2701:2022 2666:2022 2640:2022 2611:2022 2583:2022 2557:2024 2532:2024 2433:2008 2426:2010 2420:2016 2414:2020 2284:and 2280:for 2256:and 2126:, a 2112:and 2100:and 2018:and 2003:and 1987:and 1971:and 1963:and 1890:and 1828:and 1788:and 1637:FECA 1558:The 1486:and 1240:and 1115:and 1113:2000 1012:FEC 715:'s " 713:1984 579:2022 576:2020 573:2018 570:2016 567:2014 564:2012 561:2010 558:2008 555:2006 552:2004 549:2002 546:2000 445:2016 386:8.9% 307:2022 257:2022 254:2020 251:2018 248:2016 245:2014 242:2012 239:2010 236:2008 233:2006 230:2004 227:2002 224:2000 221:1998 131:and 6352:by 6316:at 6198:or 5136:doi 5095:203 4849:doi 4299:VOX 4297:". 4142:NPR 4048:hdl 4040:doi 3990:doi 3435:doi 3361:doi 3314:doi 3277:doi 3236:doi 1817:In 1536:), 1353:, " 1337:or 1170:". 1111:'s 1033:PAC 938:PAC 905:PAC 836:PAC 541:100 366:42% 287:to 105:not 6705:: 6328:. 6077:. 5932:. 5847:. 5828:. 5802:. 5683:. 5657:. 5624:. 5597:. 5585:^ 5521:. 5493:. 5467:. 5463:. 5449:^ 5367:. 5363:. 5316:. 5288:. 5240:}} 5236:{{ 5185:. 5181:. 5150:. 5142:. 5132:66 5130:. 5126:. 5056:}} 5052:{{ 5040:. 4984:. 4964:^ 4929:. 4925:. 4888:. 4865:. 4857:. 4845:14 4843:. 4837:. 4776:. 4747:. 4678:. 4649:. 4619:. 4602:. 4584:. 4568:. 4532:. 4512:. 4432:^ 4389:^ 4345:. 4323:^ 4258:. 4232:. 4202:. 4198:. 4140:. 4087:. 4064:. 4056:. 4046:. 4036:55 4034:. 4030:. 4004:. 3996:. 3986:39 3984:. 3980:. 3950:. 3911:. 3761:^ 3734:^ 3716:. 3656:^ 3638:. 3626:^ 3573:^ 3556:. 3543:^ 3526:. 3500:. 3474:. 3441:. 3431:53 3429:. 3425:. 3388:^ 3367:. 3357:82 3355:. 3351:. 3328:. 3320:. 3310:78 3308:. 3285:. 3273:21 3271:. 3267:. 3244:. 3232:60 3230:. 3226:. 3143:. 3120:. 3095:. 3070:. 3045:. 3020:. 3002:^ 2992:. 2930:. 2904:. 2836:^ 2819:. 2808:^ 2791:. 2755:^ 2723:^ 2692:. 2674:^ 2648:^ 2630:. 2619:^ 2591:^ 2574:. 2548:. 2515:. 2495:. 2474:^ 2260:. 2225:; 2116:. 1999:, 1983:, 1979:, 1651:. 1510:. 1333:A 1196:. 1054:^ 538:90 535:80 532:70 529:60 526:50 523:40 520:30 517:20 514:10 216:20 213:15 210:10 127:, 63:, 6447:) 6443:( 6388:e 6381:t 6374:v 6338:. 6225:) 6219:( 6214:) 6210:( 6206:. 6188:. 6150:. 6127:. 6106:. 6087:. 6059:. 6036:. 6019:. 5980:. 5958:. 5936:. 5918:. 5896:. 5874:. 5860:. 5832:. 5814:. 5785:. 5741:. 5720:. 5696:. 5669:. 5636:. 5610:. 5579:. 5556:. 5534:. 5506:. 5478:. 5443:. 5379:. 5349:. 5328:. 5299:. 5246:) 5232:. 5196:. 5158:. 5138:: 5107:. 5062:) 5048:. 4995:. 4945:. 4899:. 4873:. 4851:: 4789:. 4761:. 4730:. 4691:. 4660:. 4635:. 4606:. 4590:. 4572:. 4548:. 4518:. 4498:. 4472:. 4451:. 4402:" 4400:' 4353:. 4269:. 4243:. 4217:. 4183:. 4152:. 4126:. 4098:. 4072:. 4050:: 4042:: 4012:. 3992:: 3962:. 3923:. 3867:. 3833:. 3811:. 3780:. 3755:. 3728:. 3701:. 3679:. 3650:. 3620:. 3586:. 3567:. 3537:. 3511:. 3485:. 3456:. 3437:: 3410:. 3382:. 3363:: 3336:. 3316:: 3293:. 3279:: 3252:. 3238:: 3211:. 3182:. 3156:. 3106:. 3081:. 3056:. 3031:. 2996:. 2978:. 2963:. 2941:. 2916:. 2889:. 2855:. 2830:. 2802:. 2777:. 2749:. 2717:. 2703:. 2668:. 2642:. 2613:. 2585:. 2559:. 2534:. 2519:. 2499:. 1031:" 436:. 207:5 103:" 34:. 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.