Expenditure

A World Without Buckley v. Valeo

“The concept that government may restrict the speech of some elements of our society in order to enhance the relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First Amendment.” – Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 48 (1976) Decided over forty years ago, the landmark 1976 Supreme Court decision, Buckley v. Valeo, remains at […]

Filed Under: Blog, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Handouts, Contributions & Limits, Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure Handouts, Expenditure, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issues, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Money in Politics, Research, buckley, Buckley v. Valeo, Contributions & Limits, Disclosure, Expenditure, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation

A Landmark Decision Turns Forty: A Conversation on Buckley v. Valeo

In this series of essays by Brooklyn Law School President and Joseph Crea Dean Nicholas W. Allard, U.S. Court of Appeals Senior Judge and former U.S. Senator James L. Buckley, and former ACLU Executive Director Ira Glasser, the authors discuss the landmark Buckley v. Valeo Supreme Court decision after its 40th anniversary. Written as part […]

Filed Under: Contributions & Limits, Disclosure, Expenditure, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, ACLU, Buckley v. Valeo, corporate speech, corruption, eugene mccarthy, FECA, Ira Glasser, James L. Buckley, Nicholas W. Allard, Contribution Limits, Disclosure, Expenditure, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Contributions & Limits, Disclosure, Expenditure, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation

Free Speech Matters: The Roberts Court and the First Amendment

In this article, Brooklyn Law School Professor Joel M. Gora, a CCP Academic Advisor, examines the impact of the Roberts Court on First Amendment rights after ten years, particularly with regards to campaign finance law in cases like Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC. Written as part of a symposium on “Free Speech Under Fire” […]

Filed Under: Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Antonin Scalia, Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, Buckley v. Valeo, Chief Justice John Roberts, Citizens United v. FEC, Joel Gora, McCutcheon v FEC, The Roberts Court, Contribution Limits, Expenditure, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns

Why Outside Spending Is Overrated: Lessons from the 2014 Senate Elections

In this article, Emory University professor Alan Abramowitz analyzes the impact of independent spending in the 2014 U.S. Senate elections. Republicans made major gains in the 2014 Senate elections, but the findings reported in Abramowitz’s article indicate that independent spending by conservative groups had little or nothing to do with those gains. The main reason […]

Filed Under: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Expenditure, External Relations Sub-Pages, Independent Speech, Issues, Money in Politics, Research, Super PACs, Super PACs, Expenditure, Independent Speech, Expenditure, Independent Speech, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Carolina

Aggregate Effects of Large-Scale Campaigns on Voter Turnout

In this study, authors Ryan D. Enos, Assistant Professor in the Department of Government at Harvard University, and Anthony Fowler, Assistant Professor in the Harris School of Public Policy Studies at the University of Chicago, assess to what extent political campaigns mobilize voters. Despite the central role of campaigns in American politics and despite many […]

Filed Under: Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, Research, GOTV, Contribution Limits, Expenditure, Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin

Campaign Spending and Electoral Competition: Towards More Policy Relevant Research

Despite long-standing scholarly literature on the electoral effects of campaign spending, academic research provides little practical policy guidance. In part, this is because existing studies have focused narrowly on some vexing statistical issues, while ignoring many others. However, this is also because political scientists have not devoted enough effort to conducting evaluation studies of how […]

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, External Relations Sub-Pages, Faulty Assumptions, First Amendment, Political Parties, Research, campaign finance, campaign finance reform, campaign spending, First Amendment, Jeff Milyo, money in politics, political science research, Contribution Limits, Expenditure, Faulty Assumptions, First Amendment, Political Committees & 527s, Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, Faulty Assumptions, First Amendment, Political Committees & 527s

Campaigns, Mobilization, and Turnout in Mayoral Elections

In this paper, authors Thomas M. Holbrook and Aaron C. Weinschenk assess methods of increasing voter turnout by examining mayoral elections across the United States. Generally, research on local turnout has focused on institutions, with little attention devoted to examining the impact of campaigns. Using an original data set containing information from 144 large U.S. […]

Filed Under: Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, Faulty Assumptions, Research, Competition, Mayoral Elections, Voter Turnout, Contribution Limits, Expenditure, Faulty Assumptions, Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, Faulty Assumptions

The Right to “Do Politics” and Not Just to Speak: Thinking About the Constitutional Protections for Political Action

In this Duke Journal of Constitutional Law and Public Policy article by former White House Counsel to Barack Obama, Robert F. Bauer, the author examines the Supreme Court’s distinction between political contributions and campaign expenditures and its impact on campaign finance jurisprudence. In Buckley v. Valeo, the Court upheld the Federal Election Campaign Act’s limits […]

Filed Under: Contributions & Limits, Coordination, Expenditure, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Buckley v. Valeo, FECA, Federal Election Campaign Act, McCain-Feingold, Robert F. Bauer, Contribution Limits, Coordination, Expenditure, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Contributions & Limits, Coordination, Expenditure, Jurisprudence & Litigation

The (Non-)Effects of Campaign Finance Spending Bans on Macro Political Outcomes: Evidence From the States

In this study by University of Massachusetts, Amherst professors Raymond J. La Raja and Brian F. Schaffner, the authors seek to understand the effect of campaign finance laws on electoral and policy outcomes. Spurred by the 2010 Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. FEC, which eliminated bans on corporate and union political spending, the study […]

Filed Under: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, Independent Speech, Issues, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Brian F. Schaffner, Raymond J. La Raja, Contribution Limits, Expenditure, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation

The Costs of Mandating Disclosure

In this essay, John Samples argues against the fundamental reasoning underlying campaign disclosure. According to Samples, mandating disclosure “both reflects and fosters the decline of self-government in the United States.” According to the essay, not only does forced disclosure fail to achieve its goals, but it has the opportunity to “raise the cost of political participation through political abuse and economic harms.” Samples also believes mandating disclosure deflects attention from the content of the message and instead undesirably shifts the focus to the source of the message’s funding. He acknowledges that Bruce Cain’s idea for “semi-disclosure” would be a noted improvement over the status quo in disclosure requirements, but ultimately rejects Cain’s idea because of the inability to ensure that disclosure information would not be used for political retribution.

For the original essay that this piece responds to, please read, “Shade from the Glare:  The Case for Semi-Disclosure,” by Bruce Cain.

Filed Under: Disclosure, Disclosure, Research, Disclosure, Enforcement, Expenditure, Disclosure, Enforcement, Expenditure