Political party committee

Last updated

In the United States, a political party committee is an organization, officially affiliated with a political party and registered with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC), which raises and spends money for political campaigning. Political party committees are distinct from political action committees, which are formally independent of political parties and subject to different rules.

Contents

Though their own internal rules differ, the two major political parties (Democrats and Republicans) have essentially parallel sets of committees; third parties have more varied organizational structures.

National committees

The Democratic National Committee (DNC), Reform Party National Committee, Green National Committee, Libertarian National Committee, and Republican National Committee (RNC) are the official central organizations for their respective parties. They have the greatest role in presidential election years when they are responsible for planning the nominating convention. [1]

The two major parties also have two national Hill committees, controlled by their caucus leadership in each house of Congress, which work specifically to elect members of their own party to Congress.

The DNC and RNC were founded in 1848 and 1854, respectively. For much of their histories, the committees consisted of federated state organizations that came together every four years to organize a convention and support a national ticket, but did very little business outside of presidential years. [2] The two committees did not have permanent staff or headquarters in Washington, DC until the early 1900s; Republicans opened their first headquarters in 1918, and Democrats followed in 1929. [2] Beginning in the late 1970s, national party committees, including congressional committees, massively expanded their financial resources, hired larger staffs, and became more active in campaigns. [2]

Party committees spend heavily in support of their party's nominees. Spending by national party committees includes contributions directly to candidate campaigns, expenditures coordinated with nominated candidate campaigns, independent expenditures, and transfers to state or local party committees. National party expenditures may directly support a federal candidate, but may also fund general party building activities, like a voter registration drive that would help all candidates on a party's ticket in that area. [3]

The individual contribution limit to a single national party committee is indexed to inflation and increases in odd-numbered years. As of 2023, the individual contribution limit was $41,300 per calendar year. [4] [5]

State and local committees

Prior to the 1950s, many state and local party committees were a source of patronage jobs, but civil service reforms led to the decline of those systems. During the 1970s and 1980s, state party committees shifted toward professionalized operations mirroring national party committees, concentrating on fundraising and campaign services. [2]

State party organizations typically have both federal and non-federal accounts, and money can be transferred between the two under certain circumstances. (A third and more complicated category of money, Levin funds, has been created by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act.) As of 2023, the federal limit for individual contributions to a state and related local party committees is $10,000 per year. [6] Though the amount an individual can give to both the national and state party organizations are limited, there are no limits to how much state parties can transfer to their partner national parties. Campaign finance watchdogs have criticized transfers between state and national party committees for creating loopholes to avoid contribution limits. [7]

In many states, legislative campaign committees or assembly campaign committees are operated by political parties in order to raise funds and campaign for the election of party members to the state legislatures. Similar to federal party committees, these organizations recruit candidates and pool resources, staff, and expertise in order to run more effective campaigns. [2] These are federated under such national organizations as the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (formed in 1994) and Republican State Leadership Committee (formed in 2002). [8]

See also

Related Research Articles

Campaign finance laws in the United States have been a contentious political issue since the early days of the union. The most recent major federal law affecting campaign finance was the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, also known as "McCain-Feingold". Key provisions of the law prohibited unregulated contributions to national political parties and limited the use of corporate and union money to fund ads discussing political issues within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary election; However, provisions of BCRA limiting corporate and union expenditures for issue advertising were overturned by the Supreme Court in Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life.

In the United States, a political action committee (PAC) is a tax-exempt 527 organization that pools campaign contributions from members and donates those funds to campaigns for or against candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation. The legal term PAC was created in pursuit of campaign finance reform in the United States. Democracies of other countries use different terms for the units of campaign spending or spending on political competition. At the U.S. federal level, an organization becomes a PAC when it receives or spends more than $1,000 for the purpose of influencing a federal election, and registers with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), according to the Federal Election Campaign Act as amended by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. At the state level, an organization becomes a PAC according to the state's election laws.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">EMILY's List</span> American political organization

EMILYs List is an American political action committee (PAC) that aims to help elect Democratic female candidates in favor of abortion rights to office. It was founded by Ellen Malcolm in 1985. The group's name is an acronym for "Early Money Is Like Yeast". Malcolm commented that "it makes the dough rise". The saying refers to a convention of political fundraising: receiving many donations early in a race helps attract subsequent donors. EMILYs List bundles contributions to the campaigns of Democratic women in favor of abortion rights running in targeted races.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act</span> 2002 American law regulating political campaigns

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, commonly known as the McCain–Feingold Act or BCRA, is a United States federal law that amended the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which regulates the financing of political campaigns. Its chief sponsors were senators Russ Feingold (D-WI) and John McCain (R-AZ). The law became effective on 6 November 2002, and the new legal limits became effective on January 1, 2003.

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on campaign finance. A majority of justices held that, as provided by section 608 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, limits on election expenditures are unconstitutional. In a per curiam opinion, they ruled that expenditure limits contravene the First Amendment provision on freedom of speech because a restriction on spending for political communication necessarily reduces the quantity of expression. It limited disclosure provisions and limited the Federal Election Commission's power. Justice Byron White dissented in part and wrote that Congress had legitimately recognized unlimited election spending "as a mortal danger against which effective preventive and curative steps must be taken".

A 527 organization or 527 group is a type of U.S. tax-exempt organization organized under Section 527 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. A 527 group is created primarily to influence the selection, nomination, election, appointment or defeat of candidates to federal, state or local public office.

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is the primary United States federal law regulating political campaign fundraising and spending. The law originally focused on creating limits for campaign spending on communication media, adding additional penalties to the criminal code for election law violations, and imposing disclosure requirements for federal political campaigns. The Act was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on February 7, 1972.

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is the Republican Hill committee which works to elect Republicans to the United States House of Representatives.

The Hill committees are the common name for the political party committees that work to elect members of their own party to United States Congress. The four major committees are part of the Democratic and Republican parties and each work to help members of their party get elected to each chamber.

An independent expenditure, in elections in the United States, is a political campaign communication that expressly advocates for the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate that is not made in cooperation, consultation or concert with; or at the request or suggestion of a candidate, candidate's authorized committee, or political party. If a candidates agent, authorized committee, party, or an "agent" for one of these groups becomes "materially involved", the expenditure is not independent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Campaign finance in the United States</span> Contributions to American election campaign funds

The financing of electoral campaigns in the United States happens at the federal, state, and local levels 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 House of Representatives in 1990 spent on average $407,600, while the winner in 2022 spent on average $2.79 million; in the Senate, average spending for winning candidates went from $3.87 million to $26.53 million.

The presidential election campaign fund checkoff appears on US income tax return forms as the question "Do you want $3 of your federal tax to go to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund?".

In the 2008 United States presidential election, fundraising increased significantly compared to the levels achieved in previous presidential elections.

The Green Senatorial Campaign Committee (GSCC), also known as the National Green Senatorial Campaign Committee (NGSCC), is a Green Party committee working to elect Greens to the United States Senate. The organization was formed during the 2006 election cycle, operating similarly to a political action committee. In September 2007, it applied to the Federal Election Commission to be formally recognized as a campaign committee, and the following year, their request was unanimously approved. This marked the first time a party other than the Democrats or Republicans have had a Senatorial Campaign Committee recognized by the FEC.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The court held 5–4 that the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, nonprofit organizations, labor unions, and other associations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dark money</span> Undisclosed American political contributions

In politics, particularly the politics of the United States, dark money refers to spending to influence elections, public policy, and political discourse, where the source of the money is not disclosed to the public.

Fundraising plays a central role in many presidential campaigns, and is a key factor in determining the viability of candidates. Money raised is applied for the salaries of non-volunteers in the campaign, transportation, campaign materials, media advertisements and other contingencies. Under United States law, officially declared candidates are required to file campaign finance details with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) at the end of every calendar month or quarter. Summaries of these reports are made available to the public shortly thereafter, revealing the relative financial situations of all the campaigns.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hillary Victory Fund</span>

The Hillary Victory Fund was a joint fundraising committee for Hillary for America, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and 33 state Democratic committees. As of May 2016, the Fund had raised $61 million in donations.

Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. FEC, 518 U.S. 604 (1996), was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Colorado Republican Party challenged the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as to whether the "Party Expenditure Provision" of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) violated the First Amendment right to free speech. This provision put a limit on the amount of money a national party could spend on a congressional candidate's campaign. The FEC argued that the Committee violated this provision when purchasing a radio advertisement that attacked the likely candidate of the Colorado Democratic Party. The court held that since the expenditures by the committee were made independently from a specific candidate, they did not violate the campaign contribution limitations established by the FECA, and were protected under the First Amendment.

<i>FEC v. National Conservative PAC</i> 1985 United States Supreme Court case

FEC v. National Conservative PAC, 470 U.S. 480 (1985), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States striking down expenditure prohibitions of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA), which regulates the fundraising and spending in political campaigns. The FECA is the primary law that places regulations on campaign financing by limiting the amount that may be contributed. The Act established that no independent political action committee may contribute more than $1,000 to any given presidential candidate in support of a campaign.

References

  1. ↑ "The Presidential Nominating Process and the National Party Conventions, 2016: Frequently Asked Questions". Congressional Research Service.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 Reichley, A. James (1992). The Life of the Parties: A History of American Political Parties. The Free Press. ISBN   0-02-926025-6.
  3. ↑ Herrnson, Paul S. (October 2009). "The Roles of Party Organizations, Party-Connected Committees, and Party Allies in Elections". The Journal of Politics. 71 (4): 1207–1224. doi:10.1017/S0022381609990065. ISSN   0022-3816 – via JSTOR.
  4. ↑ "FEC Updates Contribution Limits for 2023-2024 Election Cycle". Elias Law Group LLP. Retrieved 2023-11-20.
  5. ↑ Giorno, Taylor (2023-02-02). "Federal Election Commission hikes contribution limits ahead of 2024 election cycle". OpenSecrets.
  6. ↑ "Presidential candidates use joint fundraising committees. So what are they?". NBC News. 2023-04-20. Retrieved 2023-11-20.
  7. ↑ Newhauser, Daniel (2020-11-26). "How state political parties helped big money pay for this year's elections". Missouri Independent.
  8. ↑ Gnoffo, Anthony (2020-03-11). "Democrats boost national fundraising for state legislatures". Roll Call. Retrieved 2023-11-28.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.