Making Sense of McCain-Feingold and Campaign-Finance Reform
The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of is a United States federal law that amended the Federal Election Campaign Act of , which regulates the financing of political campaigns. Its chief sponsors were Senators Russ Feingold (D-WI) and John McCain . corporate spending posed a particular threat to democratic self-government.get with your can i use more than one salonpas at a time why doesn t my cat like to be held
Shared Flashcard Set. Title AP Government ch. Description Chapter 9. Total Cards Subject Political Studies.
Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, is nothing if not a confident man. His confidence comes from his success in the many fields he has tackled over the years. During the s he became the Democratic Party's most productive fundraiser while founding businesses of his own, chief among them a real-estate firm. I was chairman of a bank when I was twenty-seven. Fundraising is like any other business. But although he doesn't show it, McAuliffe has undoubtedly been feeling less confident about the business of fundraising since November 6, , when the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of took effect. Commonly known as the McCain-Feingold Act, for its sponsors in the Senate John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, and Russ Feingold, a Democrat from Wisconsin , the law bans what had become a key source of financing for both parties: federal "soft money," or donations to a political party for general "party-building" activities such as get-out-the-vote efforts.
The primary purpose of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act BCRA was to eliminate the increased use of so-called soft money to fund advertising by political parties on behalf of their candidates. However, state campaign finance rules differed from federal rules, as states allowed corporations and unions to donate to state parties and candidates in large, sometimes unlimited, amounts. Such soft-money contributions could then be funneled to federal candidates and national party committees, thus circumventing the FECA limits. That practice was particularly apparent in the U. The BCRA attacked those loopholes in several ways. Second, the BCRA provided, with limited exceptions, that federal candidates, parties, officeholders, and their agents could not solicit, receive, or direct soft money to another person or organization or raise or spend any money not subject to FECA limits.
In Citizens United vs. The controversial decision effectively opened the door for corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money to support their chosen political candidates, provided they were technically independent of the campaigns themselves. District Court in Washington , D. According to Citizens United, Section of the BCRA violated the First Amendment right to free speech both on its face and as it applied to Hillary: The Movie , and other BCRA provisions regarding disclosures of funding and clear identification of sponsors were also unconstitutional. The U.
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002
The law became effective on 6 November , and the new legal limits became effective on January 1, As noted in McConnell v. Although the legislation is known as "McCain—Feingold", the Senate version is not the bill that became law.