|
United States Congress
The push for regulatory reform in campaign financing arose from two sources. The act of 1972 came from
concerns over the rapidly rising costs of media-based campaigns and shock over the amount of money rich
individuals were contributing to individual campaigns. As a result, the Federal Election Campaign Act
[FECA] of 1972 made the reporting of contributions and expenditures more detailed, and required them for
primaries and nominating conventions as well as the elections. As a trade-off, Congress repealed the old
limits on contributions as unenforceable. Second, FECA tried to set specific limits on media advertising
for congressional and presidential elections, in an attempt to hold down costs. How successful was the
1972 Act? It did not curb the spending very much, but the reporting requirements and limits on corporate
contributions led to many of the scandals of Watergate. Stories of illegal corporate contributions, attache
cases stuffed with cash, laundering of contributions to hide their sources, and even the paying of the
Watergate burglars out of campaign funds led to popular outrage. This outrage was also directed at the
activities of lobbyists and conflicts of interest by lawmakers as well as campaign finance. This all led
to the more stringent FECA of 1974.
The 1974 Act, responding to popular concerns, placed strict limits on what candidates for Congress and
the presidency could spend in their campaigns. This included spending from their own personal fortunes,
as well as limiting what independent groups could spend on their behalf. The act also limited PAC contributions
[$5000], party committee contributions [$5000], and individual contributions to candidates [$1000]. The
Federal Election Commission was created to enforce election laws and oversee elections. Finally, the disclosure
laws and public funding of elections from 1972 were retained as features in the 1974 law.
This law faced a court challenge, and in January 1976 the Supreme Court ruled in Buckley v. Valeo that
limits on expenditures were illegal. Thus individuals can spend all they want, candidates’ campaigns can
spend all the money they can possibly raise, and others may spend money "independently" of the
candidates campaign however they want. This all comes under the protection of First Amendment freedom
of expression.
Other than some minor tinkering with the law, the FECA of 1974 is the basis of our national election law
today. Do you see any major problems with this law? How could it be strengthened? Which of the original
goals of the 1972 and 1974 laws would improve our election process today?
|
