Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission, 546 U.S. 410 (2006) ___ (2022) |
The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (
As noted in
- The increased role of soft moneyin campaign financing, by prohibiting national political party committees from raising or spending any funds not subject to federal limits, even for state and local races or issue discussion;
- The proliferation of issue advocacy ads, by defining broadcast ads that name a federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or caucus or 60 days of a general election as "electioneering communications", and prohibiting any such ad paid for by a corporation (including non-profit issue organizations such as Right to Life or the Environmental Defense Fund) or paid for by an unincorporated entity using any corporate or union general treasury funds. The decision in Citizens United v. FEC overturns this provision, but not the ban on foreign corporations or foreign nationals in decisions regarding political spending.[2]
Although the legislation is known as "McCain–Feingold", the Senate version is not the bill that became law. Instead, the companion legislation, H.R. 2356—introduced by Rep. Chris Shays (R-CT), is the version that became law. Shays–Meehan was originally introduced as H.R. 380.[3]
History of the bill
In the aftermath of
In 1995, senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) jointly published an op-ed calling for campaign finance reform, and began working on their own bill.[4][6] In 1998, the Senate voted on the bill, but the bill failed to meet the 60 vote threshold to defeat a filibuster. All 45 Senate Democrats and 6 Senate Republicans voted to invoke cloture, but the remaining 49 Republicans voted against invoking cloture. This effectively killed the bill for the remainder of the 105th Congress.[7]
McCain's 2000 campaign for president and a series of scandals (including the Enron scandal) brought the issue of campaign finance to the fore of public consciousness in 2001.[4] McCain and Feingold pushed the bill in the Senate, while Chris Shays (R-CT) and Marty Meehan (D-MA) led the effort to pass the bill in the House.[4] In just the second successful use of the discharge petition since the 1980s, a mixture of Democrats and Republicans defied Speaker Dennis Hastert and passed a campaign finance reform bill.[8] The House approved the bill with a 240–189 vote, sending the bill to the Senate.[9] The bill passed the Senate in a 60–40 vote, the bare minimum required to overcome the filibuster.[6] Throughout the congressional battle on the bill, President Bush declined to take a strong position,[9] but nonethless signed the bill into law in March 2002 after it cleared both houses of Congress.
Legal disputes
Provisions of the legislation were challenged as unconstitutional by a group of plaintiffs led by then–Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, a long-time opponent of the bill.[10] President Bush signed the law despite "reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising."[11] He appeared to expect that the Supreme Court would overturn some of its key provisions. But, in December 2003, the Supreme Court upheld most of the legislation in McConnell v. FEC.
Subsequently, political parties and "watchdog" organizations have filed complaints with the FEC concerning the raising and spending of soft money by so-called "
In December 2006 the FEC entered settlements with three 527 groups the commission found to have violated federal law by failing to register as "political committees" and abide by contribution limits, source prohibitions and disclosure requirements during the 2004 election cycle. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was fined $299,500; the
In June 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court held, in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., that BCRA's limitations on corporate and labor union funding of broadcast ads mentioning a candidate within 30 days of a primary or caucus or 60 days of a general election are unconstitutional as applied to ads susceptible of a reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate.[14] Some election law experts[who?] believed that the new exception would render BCRA's "electioneering communication" provisions meaningless, while others believed the new exception to be quite narrow.
In June 2008, the section of the act known as the "millionaire's amendment" was overturned by the Supreme Court in
In March 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in
President Barack Obama expressed his concern over the Supreme Court's decision during his 2010 State of the Union Address, delivered January 27, saying, "With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in our elections. I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems."[20] President Obama also called the decision, "a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans."[19]
Impact
BCRA decreased the role of soft money in political campaigns as the law places limits on the contributions by interest groups and national political parties.[
The impact of BCRA first started being felt nationally with the 2004 elections.[
References
- ^ "Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act overview". Federal Election Commission. Archived from the original on 2012-03-24. Retrieved March 31, 2012.
- ^ Electioneering Communications, Federal Election Commission. January 2010.
- ^ "Religious Leaders Ask Senate to Pass McCain–Feingold As Written". National Council of Churches. March 20, 2001.
- ^ a b c d e f g Gitell, Seth (July 2003). "Making Sense of McCain-Feingold and Campaign-Finance Reform". The Atlantic. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
- ^ "Bush Rejects Campaign Finance Legislation". CQ Almanac. CQ Press. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
- ^ a b Welch, William (20 March 2002). "Passage ends long struggle for McCain, Feingold". USA Today. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
- ^ "Campaign Finance Bill Likely Dead For The Year". CNN. 26 February 1998t. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
- ^ Ehrenfreund, Max (29 June 2013). "The discharge petition's role in the immigration reform debate, explained". Washington Post. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
- ^ a b Barrett, Ted (15 February 2002). "Campaign finance battle moves to Senate". CNN. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
- ^ Cheves, John (15 October 2006). "Senator's pet issue: money and the power it buys". Lexington Herald-Leader. Archived from the original on 2015-07-23. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
- National Archives.
- ^ What is a 527 organization? Federal Election Commission.
- ^ Justice, Glen (January 16, 2004). "Finance Battle Shifts to Election Panel". The New York Times.
- ^ Stohr, Greg (June 25, 2007). "Campaign Ad Limits Loosened By U.S. Supreme Court". Bloomberg.
- ^ "Davis v. Federal Election Commission". Duke Law. 2007. Archived from the original on 2012-02-12. Retrieved March 31, 2012.
- ^ Senator McCain's Voting Record, On the Issues.
- ^ Nowicki, Dan; Muller, Bill (March 1, 2007). "McCain Profile: McCain becomes the 'maverick'". The Arizona Republic.
- ^ Liptak, Adam (March 24, 2009). "Justices Seem Skeptical of Scope of Campaign Law". The New York Times.
- ^ a b Liptak, Adam (January 21, 2010). "Justices, 5-4, Reject Corporate Spending Limit". The New York Times.
- ^ The White House Press Room, Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address Archived 2017-01-20 at the Wayback Machine, January 27, 2010.
External links
- McConnell v. FEC: Summary of the Supreme Court's decision
- Now Playing at Reason.tv: Former FEC Head Brad Smith on how campaign finance laws pervert politics. And why John McCain won't shake his hand. Smith calls the BCRA, "Before Campaigning, Retain Attorney."
- Full text of the bill along with a summary