Elections
AP Government
Unit 3
Functions of Elections

Serve to
 Legitimize governments
 Fill public offices
 Allow people with different views/policy
agendas to come to power
 Ensure government remains
accountable to people.
 Allows for political change
Functions of Elections

Allowed us to avoid:
 Riots
 General strikes
 Coups d'etats
Why Don’t Americans Vote?
1.
Long and complex ballots


2.
Disaffection


3.
Confusing to voters
People poorly informed
Determined by money and special interest
support
Loss of trust in government
Legal barriers--Some not allowed to vote


Today: Photo ID Rules
15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th Amendments fixed
many legal barriers
Why Don’t Americans Vote?
5. Other Legal Requirements


Not close and some voters feel it’s not
necessary
Young people/minorities less likely to vote.
Political parties don’t mobilize voters (distant
national bureaucracies)
No easy universal voter registration.
Requires effort (cost) without any cost for
nonvoting.

6.
7.
8.
9.
Age Requirements
Citizenship Requirements
Young People

2004: 20.1 million 18-29 year-olds voted, a
4.3 million jump over 2000.


2006: 18-29 year-olds’ turnout grew by
nearly 2 million over 2002 levels.


Turnout increase among youngest voters more than
double that of any other age group.
Turnout among youngest voters grew by 3 percentage
points over 2002 levels, twice turnout increase of older
voters.
2008: 18-29 year-olds turnout grew to
almost 50%!
Registering To Vote

Voter Registration
 System adopted by states that requires
voters to register in advance
 Motor Voter Act
 Requires states to permit people to
register to vote when they apply for
driver’s license.
 Millions added to electorate but election
outcomes not affected
Link on
how to
register
in Cobb
County
http://www.cobbelections.org/Registration.php
Efforts to Lower Costs Voting
Same day registration
 Easing of registration regulations




No picture ID required in most states
Show many forms of ID
Expansion of ballot access



absentee or mail balloting
Early voting (GA)
other mechanisms (internet)??
Same Day
Registration
70
60

50
Maine
Minn.
Wisc.
N. D.
Nation
40
30
20
10
0
Turnout
Produces higher
turnout

At least 30% of
American adults
change their home
address every 2
years ---must reregister!
Political Consequences
of Turnout


Do fewer voters help Republicans or
Democrats?
 Usually Republicans
 Increasing categories of voters can make a
difference in either party
Who usually wins elections- challengers or
incumbents?


Incumbents (90%+ in House and 70%+ in Senate)
Who does higher turnout help? Incumbent OR
challenger?
 Generally helps challenger but incumbents
usually still win
Seven Types of Elections
 Caucus
 Primary
Elections
 General Elections
 Initiatives
 Referendums
 Recall elections
 Run-off elections
Caucus
Political party gathers to make policy
decisions and to select candidates.
 Straw ballots or nonbinding elections
may take place in a caucus

Iowa Caucus


Most important because it’s 1st
 Garners disproportionate
number of candidate visits
and amount of media
attention.
Better than expected showing
on caucus night can boost
candidacy
Primary Elections

Select party nominees for general
election



Held on different days in different
states
Most states force voters to vote in
only 1 primary (Dem or Rep)
Run by parties for benefit of
parties
 In 1-party states, primary
election IS only election that
matters
New Hampshire


Most Important Primary
Major testing ground for
candidates for Rep. and Dem.
nominations.




Attracts most attention
Candidates who do poorly usually
have to drop out.
Little known, under funded
candidates who do well suddenly
become contenders
Some candidates spend 8-12
months there BEFORE election
Primary elections: different types



Open primaries
 Can enter voting booth then decide on party
primary in which you will vote
Closed primaries
 Must reveal your party/be registered member of
that party to vote
Blanket (or love) Primaries
 Voters may choose from both party
 Voter might select Dem. for governor and
Rep. for senator.
Primaries and Delegates
(Superdelegates)



Each party holds primary/caucus
Political elites from parties selected as pledged
delegates
 Delegates must vote as state voted on 1st
ballot
Both parties have unpledged delegates who
not obligated to vote w/state delegates
Democrats

Currently 4,049 total delegates to DNC: 3,253 pledged,
796 unpledged or superdelegates.

Total # of delegate votes needed to win: 2,025.
Republicans

Currently 2,380 total delegates to RNC: 1,917 pledged,
463 unpledged delegates.
Primaries and Delegates
(Superdelegates)
Superdelegates don’t have to indicate
candidate preference, compete for
position.
 Typically members of national committee,
elected officials like senators or governors,
or party leaders

General Elections


Elect office holders
3 types
 Off-year elections (2011, 2013, 2015..)
 Generally odd years. Include mayoral races, school
boards, etc..
 Presidential election years (2000-2004-2008-2012)
 Party nominated candidates and independents
 First Tuesday after first Monday in November
 Midterm elections (2002-2006-2010)
 General election but no presidential race
 Still first Tuesday after first Monday in November
 Both party-nominated candidates and independents
but fewer voters
General Election Turnout
Voter turnout highest for general
elections
 In presidential years, general election
turnout highest
 In midterm elections, general election
turnout decreases in most states

Initiatives
 Allow
citizens to propose legislation
and submit it to popular vote.
 Popular in CA and western states




Initiative 85 - Parental Notification before
Termination of Teen's Pregnancy
Initiative 86 - Increase on Cigarette Tax
Initiative 87 - Funding for alternative forms of
energy
Initiative 88 - Property Parcel Tax to fund for
Education
Referendum

Allows legislature to submit
proposed legislation for popular
approval.




Special elections on certain topics or
issues
State voters approve or disapprove
proposed legislation.
Often used for constitutional
amendments
I.E. GA Legislature
sponsored
“Marriage Amendment”

Passed with overwhelming support
Georgia Marriage Amendment
Constitutional Amendment 1 appeared on the ballot in
Georgia as a legislatively-referred amendment on
November 2, 2004. The results are shown below.
Shall the Constitution be amended so as to provide that this
state shall recognize as marriage only the union of man and
woman?
Question 1
Result
Yes
No
Votes
Percentage
2,454,930
76.2%
768,716
23.8%
Recall Elections
 Allow
citizens to remove someone
from office.
Voters decide whether or not to vote out
an official
 CA recalled Governor Gray Davis and
elected Arnold Schwarzenegger

Runoff Elections
 Allow
citizens to pick from top 2 vote
candidates AFTER primary or general
election.
GA allows run-offs.
 Many other states do not.

Instant Runoff
 Allows
ballot to be recounted if no
candidate wins a majority.

Voters rank all the candidates (1-2-3…)
 AKA
“Transferable Vote System”
Yellow Dog
Democrat
Staunch loyalist to Dem. Party.
 Term first occurred in 1928 elections, when
Al Smith ran for President against Herbert
Hoover.


Southerners hated Hoover, popular saying, "I'd
vote for a yellow dog if he ran on the
Democratic ticket"
Blue Dog Democrats
Fiscally conservative Democratic
Blue Dog Coalition formed in 1995
with goal of representing center of House
of Rep. and appealing to mainstream
values of public.
 Dedicated to set of beliefs that
transcend partisan politics, including
commitment to financial stability/ national
security of US
 Currently 26 members

Blue Dog Districts
Electoral College

Framers wanted president chosen by elite
of country


Winner-Take-All system gives bigger
emphasis to more populated states


Electoral College established
Except for NE and ME which use divided
elector system
State parties choose electors

Usually party elite
The Electoral College

How it works:
 Each state has as many votes as it does
Representatives and Senators.
 Winner of popular vote typically gets ALL the
Electoral College votes.



Except for NE and ME which divide electoral votes
Electors meet in December, votes are reported
by the vice president in January.
If no candidate gets 270 votes (a majority), the
House of Representatives votes for president,
with each state getting ONE vote.
Electoral College Map (2000)
Op-Chart: How Much Is Your Vote Worth?
This map shows each state re-sized in proportion to the
relative influence of the individual voters who live there.
The numbers indicate the total delegates to the Electoral College
from each state, and how many eligible
voters a single delegate from each state represents.
Should We Change the
Current Electoral System?
Use Popular Vote Instead of E. College
Alter Current System
 Divide electoral votes within states
 Use popular vote as secondary check
Alternative Voting Systems
 Plurality voting system
 Hare System (Similar to Transferable Vote System but with
different rounds)


The Borda Count
Sequential Pair-Wise Voting
Alternative Voting Systems
Voting System #1
Voting System #2
Plurality
The Hare System (Similar to
Transferable Vote System)
 A common method of voting
 This method involves taking
is called plurality. In this
an initial poll in which each
system, each person casts
person casts one vote for
one vote for a choice and
his or her favorite option.
the option with the option
The option receiving the
with the most votes wins.
least number of first place
votes is eliminated, and
then another poll is taken.
Those who originally voted
for the eliminated option
vote for their second choice.
Continually eliminate the
least popular option until a
single winner emerges.
Alternative Voting Systems
Voting System #3The Borda Count
 This is a voting method that
takes into account each
voter’s first, second, and third
choices.
 Each first-choice vote is
awarded two points, each
second choice vote is awarded
one point, and no point is
awarded for a third choice.
This way, each choice is
assigned a point-value.
 Example: For Al Gore has
seventeen first-choice votes
and five second-choice votes,
for a total of 2(17) + 1(15) =
39 points.
Voting System #4
Sequential Pair-Wise
Voting
 This method involves a
sequence of head-to-head
contests.
 First, the group votes on
any one of two of the
options and then the
preferred option is
matched with the next
option, while the ‘loser’ is
eliminated. Continue
eliminating the less
popular option of a pairing,
until one remains.
A History of American
Elections
From George Washington’s
Farewell Address
Warned about dangers of
political parties
 “…the spirit of Party are
sufficient to make it the
interest and the duty of a
wise People to discourage
and restrain it.”

Thanks but “NO THANKS” George

Political Parties immediately formed

1800
 Federalists
v Anti-Federalists
 Big Government v Small Government
 Hamilton v Jefferson
4 instances where winner of popular
vote didn’t get presidency:




1824: House selects John Quincy Adams (loser:
Andrew Jackson)
1876: Samuel Tilden wins popular vote,
Rutherford Hayes wins presidency.
1888: Benjamin Harrison edged in popular vote
by Grover Cleveland, but Harrison wins in
electoral college.
2000: Gore wins popular vote, Bush takes
presidency after US Supreme Court decides
Florida dispute.
Important Elections to Know
*Critical/Realigning Elections on Test
1800*
 1828*
 1860*
 1896*
 1932*
 1952
 1960
 1964
 1968
 1972
 1976

1980
 1984
 1988
 1992
 1994**
 1996
 2000
 2004
 2006**
 2008
 2010**

**Important Midterm Election on Test
 Who
ran?
 Who won?
 Why did they win?
Who voted for them?
 Where did they live?
 What party?
 What were their
political beliefs?

Party Realignment/Critical Elections


Occurs when new voting coalition appears in
election year
 Often after long period of little party change
Critical or realigning elections
 1800 (Republican Democrats)
 1828 (Jacksonian Democrats)
 1860 (Republicans- abolitionists)
 1896 (Democrats-Populists and farmers;
Republicans-City and business interests)
 1932 (New Deal Coalition Democrats)
Election of 1800*

Thomas Jefferson (RD)

(Republican Democrats)

Jeffersonians- states’ rights

John Adams (F)
Election of 1828

Andrew Jackson (D)



“Common man” voters
No land requirements
John Quincy Adams (F)
Election of 1860*




Abraham Lincoln (R)
 Anti-slavery
Stephen Douglas
 No. Democrat
John C. Breckenridge
 So. Democrat
Bell
 Constitutional Unionist
Election of 1896*

William McKinley (R)


Pro business and city dwellers
William Jennings Bryan (D)
Election of 1932*

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (D)


The powerful New Deal Coalition
was born
 Labor Unions, farmers, Populists,
African-Americans, Southern
whites, and socially-conscious
individuals
 Much of this coalition still votes
for Democrats today
Herbert Hoover (R)
Election of 1948

Harry S Truman (D)


Unpopular yet politically savvy
Thomas Dewey (R)
Election of 1952
Adlai Stevenson(D)
 Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)


The first political commercial to air
on television


I Like Ike!!
And the nation did, too!
Election of 1956
Adlai Stevenson(D)
 Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)



His heart attack in the summer of
‘56 did not take away the support of
the American people
Bigger win than first time!
Election of 1960

John F. Kennedy (D)


Television
Richard Nixon (R)
Election of 1964

Lyndon B. Johnson (D)


Daisy commercial
Barry Goldwater (R)
Election of 1968

Richard Nixon (R)



Humphrey (D)- 1968


Silent majority
Southern strategy
Democrats are splintered after violence at
1968 Chicago Convention
Wallace (I)-1968

Takes away votes in South from Dems
Election of 1972

1972
 Nixon (R)
 “Nixon

Now”!
George McGovern (D) 1972
 Unpopular
with political and party elite
 Selected as nominee at DNC because no
one else was front runner and he had
grassroots support from primaries
Election of 1976

Jimmy Carter (D)


Washington outsider
Gerald Ford (R)

Why did you pardon Nixon??
Election of 1980


1980
Ronald Reagan (R)




“Anyone but Carter” mindset
Conservative strategy will fix economy
Christian Coalition and Moral Majority joined
forces to elect Republicans (Pro-life)
Jimmy Carter (D)

Iranian Hostage crisis and sinking economy hurt
Carter’s chance for reelection
Election of 1984
Ronald “Landslide” Reagan (R)
 Walter Mondale (D)

Election of 1988

George H.W. Bush (R)




Reagan’s VP
Was able to use the Reagan successes to get
elected
Used negative ads to his advantage
Michael Dukakis (D)


Governor of MA
Debate question and “Tank” commercial hurt
image
Election of 1992

Bill Clinton (D)




George HW Bush (R)


“It’s the economy, stupid”
Used Bush’s promise of “Read my lips, no new
taxes” brilliantly (James Carville)
Perot took away some of the votes that would
have gone to Bush
Out of touch with Americans
Ross Perot (Reform)

19% of popular vote- WOW!!
Election of 1994**
Midterm election
 Ushered in the “Conservative
Revolution” headed by Newt Gingrich
 AKA…the “Devolution Revolution”
 Gingrich and his fellow Conservative
Republicans offered Americans a “Contract
with America”

1994 House Midterms
1-2 Democratic seat pickup
1-2 Republican seat pickup
3-5 Republican seat pickup
6 Republican seat pickup
Election of 1996

Bill Clinton (D)


Bob Dole (R)


Ran on successes and economic
upswing
Ineffective campaign strategies
Ross Perot (Reform Party)

Did not run as an effective campaign
as in 1992
Election of 2000

George W. Bush (R)

Squeaker election


Thrown in to Supreme Ct.


VP AL Gore v Governor Jeb Bush
Al Gore (D)


Florida was swing state
If had he won his own home state of TN he
would have not needed FL!
Ralph Nader (Green)

Green’s took away some of the natural base of
Democrats
The “Butterfly” Ballot
The “Hanging Chads” from 2000
Election of 2004

George W. Bush (R)




9-11
War on terror
Character issues
John Kerry (D)

Was “swiftboated” by Vietnam war
vets
•286 Red -Bush/Cheney
•251 Blue -Kerry/Edwards
•1 Light blue -John Edwards.
Election of 2006**
Midterm election
 Brought Democrats back to power in
both Houses of Congress for 1st time in
over 10 years
 War in Iraq was factor
 President Bush’s unpopularity was also a
factor

Summary of the November 7, 2006
United States House of Representatives election results
Seats
Party
Popular Vote
2004
2006
+/−
%
Vote
%
+/−
Democratic Party
202
233
+31
53.6%
42,082,311
52.0%
+5.4%
Republican Party
232
202
−30
46.4%
35,674,808
44.1%
–5.1%
Independents
1
0
−1
0
220,842
0.3%
-0.3%
Others
0
0
0
0
2,997,576
3.6%
+0.0%
435
435
0
100.0%
80,975,537
100.0%
0
Total
Voter turnout: 36.8 %
Source: Election Statistics - Office of the Clerk
Summary of the November 7, 2006 United States Senate election results
Party1
Breakdown
Seats
Popular Vote
Up
Elected
Not Up
2004
2006
+/−
Vote
%
Democratic Party
17
22
27
44
49
+5
33,929,202
53.91
%
Republican Party
15
9
40
55
49
−6
26,674,169
42.38
%
Independents
1
2
0
1
2
+1
879,032
1.40%
Libertarian Party
0
0
0
0
0
0
614,629
0.98%
Green Party
0
0
0
0
0
0
414,660
0.66%
Others
0
0
0
0
0
0
141,074
0.22%
33
33
67
100
100
0
62,938,294
100%
Total
Voter turnout: 29.7 %
Sources: Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, United States Elections Project at George Mason University
Election of 2008

Barack Obama (Dem)



Message of change resonated with voters
Young people!
John McCain (Rep)
Too old??
 Not conservative enough for right wing
Republicans and not liberal enough for Dems
to cross over
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/presi
dent/exit-polls.html

Sources: Gallup, AP, WSJ.com research
NOTES:
Plotted points are the averages of all approval polls taken by
Gallup in each three-month period of each presidency. The
first two points for Johnson and Ford are for polls taken in
their first two months. Key dates are marked next to the
poll results for the three-month period in which they took
place
Election of 2010**
Midterm election
 Brought Republicans back to power in
Houses of Representatives since 2006
 Economy and recession major factors
 President Obama’s unpopularity also
factor

Important Cases Concerning Elections
Baker
v Carr
Shaw v Reno
Miller v Johnson
Buckley v Valeo
Citizens United v FEC
Reapportionment and Redistricting
Reapportionment:
Seats in House
reallocated after each
census


EX: GA gained 2 seats after
2000 census
States then redistrict
seats according to pop.
growth within state.


Done by state
legislatures
Redistricting in Georgia After 2000 Census
From 11 Seats to 13 Seats
Supreme Court Rules for
Redistricting and Gerrymandering




Congressional districts must be
apportioned on basis of pop.
Congressional districts must be
contiguous (no broken lines)
Using gerrymandering to dilute
minority strength illegal under 1965
Voting Rights Act
Redrawing boundaries SOLELY based
on race unconstitutional according Shaw
v Reno
Baker v Carr 1961
Facts of Case
 Charles W. Baker and other Tennessee citizens
alleged that 1901 law designed to apportion
seats for state's General Assembly was ignored.
Baker's suit detailed how Tennessee's
reapportionment efforts ignored economic
growth and pop. shifts within state.

Question
 Did the Supreme Court have jurisdiction over
questions of legislative apportionment?

Baker v Carr 1961


Conclusion
Yes! Court held that no such questions were to be
answered in case and legislative apportionment
was justifiable issue.



One man, one vote
Justice Brennan provided past examples where
Court intervened to correct constitutional
violations in matters pertaining to state
administration and officers through whom state
affairs are conducted.
Brennan concluded that 14th Amendment equal
protection issues which Baker and others raised in
this case merited judicial evaluation.
Shaw v. Reno- 1993




Case concerned reapportionment and civil rights
NC created congressional district which was no
wider than interstate road along which it
stretched in order to create black-majority
district
 AKA “Majority-minority district”
5 NC residents challenged constitutionality of
unusually shaped district, alleging its only
purpose was to secure election of additional black
representatives.
Was this gerrymandering case constitutional?
North Carolina District under scrutiny in Shaw v Reno
Ruling and Importance



Court said NO!
Ruled although NC’s reapportionment plan
racially neutral on its face, resulting district
shape bizarre enough to suggest it constituted
an effort to separate voters into different
districts based on race.
Districts cannot be based on 1 factor
alone- race
 Unusual district seemed to exceed what was
reasonably necessary to avoid racial
imbalances.
 Left door open for some instances in future.
Miller
v
Johnson
1995
Facts of the Case






1980-1990: only 1 of GA’s 10 congressional districts majorityblack.
1990 census: GA’s black population of 27% entitled blacks to
additional 11th congressional seat, prompting GA’s General
Assembly to re-draw state's congressional districts.
 Assembly finally successful in creating additional majorityblack district
District called "geographic monstrosity,” extended 6,784.2
square miles from Atlanta to Atlantic Ocean.
 Gerrymandered district went from Stone Mountain to
Savannah!!
Question
Is racial gerrymandering of the congressional redistricting process
a violation of the Equal Protection Clause?
Example of Gerrymandering in Georgia 11th District-1992
-Attempt to Create a “Majority- Minority” District
Miller v Johnson 1995





Conclusion
Yes. In some instances, reapportionment plan may be so highly
irregular and bizarre in shape that it rationally cannot be
understood as anything other than effort to segregate voters
based on race.
GA case that reaffirmed Shaw
Using race only to draw Congressional district was
unconstitutional
Applying rule laid down in Shaw v. Reno requires strict scrutiny
whenever race is "overriding, predominant force" in redistricting
process.
Money and Politics
Federal Election Campaign Act of
1971 (FECA)

Broad Comprehensive Change in Election Law
1. Defined elections to include primaries, caucuses and
conventions, & general/special elections.
2. Defined expenditures and contributions.
3. Prohibited promises of patronage.
4. Prohibited contracts between candidate and any Federal
department or agency.
5. Exempted from regulation contributions and
expenditures for non-partisan or non-candidate based
get out vote and voter registration drives by unions and
corporations.
Federal Election Campaign Act of
1971 (FECA) Continued…
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Exempted from regulation contributions and
expenditures for voluntary fundraising and
administration by unions and corporations.
Established caps on amount individuals could
contribute to own campaign: Presidential and Vice
Presidential candidates, $50,000 each; Senatorial
candidates, $35,000 each; and House candidates,
$25,000 each.
Established caps on TV ads at 10 cents per voter in last
election or $50,000, whichever was higher.
Established disclosure guidelines for contributions of
$100 or higher.
Expenditure and contribution reports made due by March
10 of each year.
Amendments to the FECA (1974)

After Watergate, distrust of public officials was at
peak.



Reformers in Congress pushed for campaign finance
reform.
1974 Amendments to FECA passed quickly,
signed by Ford.
Legitimated Political Action Committees, changed
contribution limits, and established Federal
Election Commission (FEC).
Amendments to the FECA (1974)
Continued…


Public Funding for Presidential Races
 Defined "major party" as 1 received at least 25% of vote in last
federal election.
 Set up system where private gifts to presidential candidate
would be matched by funds raised through Long Act.
Disclosure and Enforcement
 Treated loans as contributions.
 Fines for not reporting could be as high as $50,000.
 Violators could be prevented from running for federal office for
the length of the term of the office sought, plus one year.
 Gave FEC power of advisory opinions.
 Required full reports of contributions and expenditures to
be filed 10 days before and 30 days after each election.
 Required candidates to set up 1 campaign banking headquarters
for easy research and accountability.
Creation of the FEC


1975: Congress created Federal Election
Commission (FEC) to administer/enforce FECA statute that governs financing of federal
elections.
Duties of FEC:

Disclose campaign finance info, enforce law
(limits/prohibitions on contributions), oversee public
funding of Pres. elections.
Buckley v Valeo (1976)

Facts



Issue of campaign contributions came under
scrutiny after Watergate
FEC set guidelines and limits on money given to
campaigns
 Was this constitutional??
Court had to decide whether or not you can be
limited by amount you can spend on your OWN
personal campaign
 Was this constitutional??
Importance




Yes!
Case upheld limits on campaign spending set by
FEC
 Today it is $2500 per election per
candidate
No!
Spending own money on campaign was found to
be free speech right.
 Mitt Romney, Ross Perot, and other wealthy
Americans have taken advantage of personal
wealth in quest for office.
Hard Money/
Individual Contributions


Given directly to candidates: Limited by law
Individual Limits
 (FEC) limits individuals to contributions of
$2,500 per election, per candidate
 Could contribute $2,500 in primary and
another $2,500 in general election
 $30,400 to party committees
 $10,000 to state, district, and local party
 $115,000 TOTAL every 2 years
Soft Money /
Individual Contributions

Contributed to political parties with no
limits or rules

Contributed to campaigns but NOT directly from
donor
Banned by BCRA due to abuses by
parties
 Soft money raised and spent outside of
federal election guidelines before BCRA.

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act


Passed in 2002
 AKA McCain-Feingold Act
Banned national political party
committees from accepting/
spending soft money contributions
 Original intent lost in loopholes
 Other parts declared
unconstitutional by Supreme Ct. in
Citizens United v FEC
527’s
Groups that developed from
loopholes in McCain-Feingold Act
 Many run by special interest
groups, used to raise unlimited
amounts of $ to spend on issue
advocacy and voter mobilization.
 Don’t give money to any particular
campaign/candidate
 NOT regulated by FEC

The 527 Loophole
Form of soft money used to pay for 527
ads that don’t expressly advocate
election/defeat of particular candidate.
 Can’t use words "vote for", "elect", "vote
against“… these ads can’t be paid for with
unregulated soft money.


Many argue that huge infusion of unregulated
soft money has “destroyed the federal
campaign laws”.
‘Swiftboating”
May 5, 2004: RNC accused MoveOn.org
and others 527’s of coordinating efforts
with Kerry campaign

http://www.moveon.org/
Aug.
20, 2004: Kerry campaign
accused “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth”
of coordinating efforts with Bush
campaign
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/co
mmercials/2004/any-questions/
Political Action Committees (PAC’s)



Private groups organized to elect/defeat
government officials, promote
legislation
Must register 6 months in advance,
have at least 50 contributors, and
give to at least 5 candidates.
 Over 4,000 PACs registered with FEC
PACs may donate




$5,000 per candidate, per election
$15,000 to national party chairman
$5000 to local, state, and district
committees
$5000 to other PAC’s
Money from PACS




May receive up to $5,000 from any 1 individual,
PAC/party committee per calendar year.
Can give $5,000 to candidate committee per
election (primary, general or special).
 Can give up to $15,000 annually to any national
party committee, and $5,000 annually to any
other PAC.
Support candidates with campaign $$
 ½ sponsored by corporations; 1/10 by unions
 1/3 liberal and 2/3 conservative (2001)
Incumbents get most PAC money!!
Money Limits and Money Needs
Individuals can give up to $2500 to
candidate per election cycle but PACS can
give $5,000 to candidate
 Fed. money will match money raised for
presidential campaigns if legitimate
candidate requests it but….
 Parties need at least 5% of vote in
previous year for presidential
candidate to receive funds
 If that doesn’t happen you need PAC’s!!!

Top PAC’s in 2009-10
PAC Name
Total Amount
Dem Pct
Repub Pct
Honeywell International
$2,760,600
55%
45%
AT&T Inc
$2,597,375
50%
50%
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
$2,561,123
98%
2%
National Beer Wholesalers Assn
$2,244,500
56%
44%
American Assn for Justice
$2,202,500
97%
3%
Operating Engineers Union
$2,109,300
89%
11%
American Bankers Assn
$1,981,430
39%
61%
American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees
$1,869,500
100%
0%
International Assn of Fire Fighters
$1,843,500
83%
17%
National Assn of Realtors
$1,818,298
58%
41%
Boeing Co
$1,765,000
59%
41%
Teamsters Union
$1,732,910
98%
2%
American Crystal Sugar
$1,729,500
68%
32%
American Federation of Teachers
$1,682,250
100%
0%
Laborers Union
$1,670,000
96%
4%
Lockheed Martin
$1,657,950
58%
42%
Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union
$1,646,500
98%
2%
Credit Union National Assn
$1,598,446
58%
42%
National Air Traffic Controllers Assn
$1,594,900
83%
17%
Plumbers/Pipefitters Union
$1,554,075
96%
3%
Citizens United v FEC (2010)


Facts of Case
Citizens United sought injunction against FEC to
prevent application of BCRA to its film Hillary: The
Movie.


In attempt to regulate "big money" campaign
contributions, BCRA applied variety of restrictions
to "electioneering communications.”


Movie expressed opinions about whether Senator Hilary
Rodham Clinton would make good president.
BCRA (McCain-Feingold Act) prevents corporations/labor
unions from funding such communication from general
funds and require disclosure of donors disclaimer when
communication not authorized by candidate it intends to
support.
Citizens United argued its 1st Amendment rights
violated.
Importance

Rules Left in Place




Court further held that BCRA's disclosure requirements as
applied to The Movie were constitutional.
Held that political speech may be banned based on
speaker's corporate identity.
Reasoned revealing identity of ad’s sponsor justified by
"governmental interest" in providing "electorate with
information" about election-related spending resources.
Rules that were Changed


Government may not limit corporate independent
expenditures.
1st Amendment doesn’t allow government to impose
restrictions on certain corporations/labor unions.

Political speech "indispensable" to democracy, which is no
less true because speech comes from corporation.
Super PACs

New kind of political action committee
created in July 2010 following of Citizens
United
 Known
as “independent
expenditure-only committees”
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbertreport-videos/382014/april-14-2011/colbertsuper-pac---trevor-potter
Super PACs

May raise unlimited sums of money from
 Corporations
 Unions
 Associations and individuals
 Spend unlimited sums to overtly advocate for or
against political candidates.


Unlike traditional PACs, Super PACs prohibited from
donating money directly to political candidates.
Super PACs must report donors to FEC on
monthly/quarterly basis -- Super PAC's choice -as traditional PAC would