Elections
AP Government
Unit 5
The Functions of Elections

Elections serve
 to legitimize governments
 to fill public offices and organize
governments
 to allow people with different views
and policy agendas to come to power
 to ensure that the government remains
accountable to the people.
The Functions of Elections
Most political change in the United
States comes about because of
elections.
 Elections generally have allowed us to
avoid:
 Riots
 General strikes
 Coups d'etats

Why Don’t Americans Vote?
1.
Long and complex ballots

2.
3.
People are poorly informed
Disaffection



4.
Confusing to voters (I)
Elections are determined by money and special
interest support
I- Institutional Barriers
Loss of trust in government
that are governmental
in nature or
Alienation
Legal barriers (I)

Some groups were not allowed to vote


Constitution-based
Today: Photo ID Rules (I)
Through the 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th
Amendments fixed many legal barriers
Why Don’t Americans Vote?
5. Other Legal Requirements


6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Age Requirements (I)
Citizenship Requirements (I)
Because many elections are not close and
some voters feel it’s not necessary
The population has a greater percentage of
young people and minorities who are less
likely to vote.
Political parties do not mobilize voters; to
many they are distant national bureaucracies.
Some states still do not have easy universal
voter registration. (I)
Voting itself still requires effort (cost) without
any cost for nonvoting.
Young People

In 2004, 20.1 million 18-29 year-olds voted,
a 4.3 million jump over 2000.


In 2006, 18-29 year-olds’ turnout grew by
nearly 2 million over 2002 levels.


The turnout increase among the youngest voters was
more than double that of any other age group.
Turnout among the youngest voters grew by 3
percentage points over 2002 levels, twice the turnout
increase of older voters.
In 2008, 18-29 year-olds turnout grew to
almost 50%!
Registering To Vote

Voter Registration
 A system adopted by the states that
requires voters to register in advance
 Motor Voter Act
 Requires states to permit people to
register to vote when the apply for their
driver’s license.
 Millions added to electorate but the
election outcomes were not affected
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 --- and hence
must re-register!
The Political Consequences
of Turnout

Do fewer voters help Republicans or
Democrats?

Who usually wins elections- challengers or
incumbents?

Who does higher turnout help the incumbent
OR the challenger?
The Political Consequences
of Turnout


Do fewer voters help Republicans or
Democrats?
 Usually Republicans
 But 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 the incumbent
OR the challenger?
 Generally helps the challenger but
incumbents usually still win
Do we vote for the Candidate
or the Campaign?



Today, most people vote for a
candidate not the campaign
 He/she is even more
important than money 
Campaigns are able (most of the
time) to downplay a candidate’s
weaknesses and emphasize
his/her strengths.
However, even the best
campaigns cannot put an
ineffective candidate in the win
column – most of the time 
Seven Types of Elections
 Caucus
 Primary
Elections
 General Elections
 Initiatives
 Referendums
 Recall elections
 Run-off elections
Caucus
A caucus is when a political party gathers
to make policy decisions and to select
candidates.
 Straw ballots or nonbinding elections
may take place in a caucus

The Iowa Caucus


The Iowa Caucus is the most
important because it is first
 As a result, Iowa garners a
vastly disproportionate
number of candidate visits
and amount of media
attention.
A better than expected
showing on caucus night can
boost a candidacy, while a
poor performance can spell the
end of a candidate's hopes.
Primary Elections

Primary elections select party
nominees for the general election



Held on different days in different
states
Most states force voters to vote in
only one primary (Dem or Rep)
Primaries are run by the parties
for the benefit of the parties
 In one-party states, the
primary election IS the only
election that matters

New Hampshire

The Most Important Primary is
held in NH
The major testing ground for
candidates for the Republican
and Democratic nominations.





Most important because it is FIRST
Attracts the most attention of the
press corps
Candidates who do poorly usually
have to drop out.
Little known, under funded
candidates who do well suddenly
become contenders, as they gain
huge amounts of media attention
and money
Some candidates spend 8-12
months there BEFORE the
election
Primary elections: different types



Open primaries
 You can enter the voting booth and then decide
on the party primary in which you will vote
Closed primaries
 You must reveal your party OR be a registered
member of that party to vote
Blanket (or love) Primaries
 In blanket primaries voters may choose from
both party ballots in a primary
 For instance, a voter might select a Democrat
for governor and a Republican for senator.
 California’s blanket primary was struck down as
unconstitutional in 2001
General Elections


In general elections we elect office holders
Three types of general elections
 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 the first Monday in November
 Midterm elections (2002-2006-2010)
 General election but no presidential race
 Still first Tuesday after the first Monday in
November
 Both party-nominated candidates and independents
but fewer voters
General Election Turnout
Voter turnout is the highest for general
elections
 In presidential years, the general election
turnout is the highest
 In midterm elections, general election
turnout decreases in most states

Initiatives
 Initiatives
allow citizens to propose
legislation and submit it to popular
vote.
 Popular in California 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

A referendum allows the 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
The Georgia Legislature recently
sponsored the “Marriage
Amendment”

It passed with overwhelming support
Recall Elections
 Recall
elections allow citizens to
remove someone from office.
Voters decide whether or not to vote out
an official
 California recalled Governor Gray Davis
and elected Arnold Schwarzenegger

 The“Governator”
Runoff Elections

A voting system used to elect a single
winner, whereby only two candidates from
the first round continue to the second round
 Runoff
elections allow citizens to pick
from the top two vote candidates
AFTER a primary or general election.
Georgia allows run-offs.
 Many other states do not.

Instant Runoff
 Instant
Runoffs allows ballot to be
recounted if no candidate wins a
majority.

Voters rank all the candidates (1-2-3…)
 Also
known as the “Transferable Vote
System”
Yellow Dog
Democrat
A Yellow Dog Democrat is a staunch
loyalist to the Democratic Party.
 The term, Yellow Dog Democrat, first
occurred in the 1928 elections, when Al
Smith ran for President against Herbert
Hoover.


Southerners hated Hoover, hence, the popular
saying, "I'd vote for a yellow dog if he ran
on the Democratic ticket" was born!
Blue Dog Democrats
The fiscally conservative Democratic
Blue Dog Coalition was formed in 1995
with the goal of representing the center of the House
of Representatives and appealing to the mainstream
values of the American public.
 The Blue Dogs are dedicated to a core set of beliefs that
transcend partisan politics, including a deep commitment
to the financial stability and national security of the
United States.
 Currently there are 52 members of the Blue Dog
Coalition.
 A blue dog is the mascot because when dogs are not
let into the house, they stay outside in the cold and
turn blue

The Electoral College

Framers wanted president chosen by the
elite of the country


Winner-Take-All system gives bigger
emphasis to more populated states


The Electoral College was established
Except for NE and ME which use a divided
elector system
State parties choose the electors

Electors are 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.
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
As he addressed Congress
and his administration he
warned about the 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
 And the rest is history!!


1800
 Federalists
v Anti-Federalists
 Big Government v Small Government
 Hamilton v Jefferson
Four instances in which winner of the
popular vote didn’t get the 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 a new voting coalition appears in an
election year
 Often after a long period of little party change
These are called 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- “common man”
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
Unable to counter ‘Willy Horton’ –type ads
Debate question and “Tank” commercial hurt
image
Election of 1992

Bill Clinton (D)




“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
George HW Bush (R)

Out of touch with Americans



Price of milk???
Grocery store scanner
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”

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
Election of 2004

George W. Bush (R)




9-11
War on terror
Character issues
John Kerry (D)

Was “swiftboated” by Vietnam war
vets
Election of 2006**
Midterm election
 Brought Democrats back to power in
both Houses of Congress for first time in
over 10 years
 The War in Iraq was factor
 President Bush’s unpopularity was also a
factor

Election of 2008

Barack Obama (Dem)




Message of change resonated with voters
Young people!
“50 state strategy”
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

Election of 2010**
Midterm election
 Brought Republicans back to power in
the Houses of Representatives for first
time since 2006
 The economy and recession were both
major factors
 President Obama’s unpopularity was also
a factor

Important Cases Concerning Elections
Baker
v Carr
Shaw v Reno
Miller v Johnson
Buckley v Valeo
Citizens United v FEC


Reapportionment and Redistricting
The seats in the House of
Representatives are
reallocated after each
decennial census is a
process known as
reapportionment.

For example Georgia
gained 2 seats after the
2000 census
Once reapportionment is
completed, states then
redistrict the seats
according to population
growth within the state.

This is done by state
legislatures
Supreme Court Rules for
Redistricting and Gerrymandering




Congressional districts must be
apportioned on the basis of population
Congressional districts must be
contiguous (no broken lines)
Using gerrymandering to dilute
minority strength is illegal under the
1965 Voting Rights Act
Redrawing boundaries SOLELY based
on race is unconstitutional according to
Shaw v Reno
Baker v Carr 1961
Facts of the Case
 Charles W. Baker and other Tennessee citizens
alleged that a 1901 law designed to apportion
the seats for the state's General Assembly was
virtually ignored. Baker's suit detailed how
Tennessee's reapportionment efforts ignored
significant economic growth and population
shifts within the state.

Question
 Did the Supreme Court have jurisdiction over
questions of legislative apportionment?

Baker v Carr 1961


Conclusion
Yes! In an opinion which explored the nature of
"political questions" and the appropriateness of
Court action in them, the Court held that there
were no such questions to be answered in this
case and that legislative apportionment was a
justifiable issue.



One man, one vote
In his opinion, Justice Brennan provided past
examples in which the Court had intervened to
correct constitutional violations in matters
pertaining to state administration and the officers
through whom state affairs are conducted.
Brennan concluded that the Fourteenth
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
North Carolina created a congressional district
which was, in parts, no wider than the interstate
road along which it stretched in order to create a
black-majority district
 AKA… The creation of a “Majority-minority
district”
Five North Carolina residents challenged the
constitutionality of this unusually shaped district,
alleging that its only purpose was to secure the
election of additional black representatives.
Was this gerrymandering case constitutional?
Ruling and Importance



The Court said NO in this case!
It ruled although North Carolina's
reapportionment plan was racially neutral on its
face, the resulting district shape was bizarre
enough to suggest that it constituted an effort
to separate voters into different districts based
on race.
Districts can not just be based on one
factor alone- race
 The unusual district, while perhaps created
by noble intentions, 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





Between 1980 and 1990, only one of Georgia's ten congressional
districts was majority-black. According to the 1990 decennial
census, Georgia's black population of 27% entitled blacks to an
additional eleventh congressional seat, prompting Georgia's
General Assembly to re-draw the state's congressional districts.
 After the Justice Department refused pre-clearance of several
of the Assembly's proposed new districts, the Assembly was
finally successful in creating an additional majority-black
district through the forming of an eleventh district.
This district, however, was called a "geographic monstrosity"
because it extended 6,784.2 square miles from Atlanta to the
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?
Miller v Johnson 1995





Conclusion
Yes. In some instances, a reapportionment plan may be so highly
irregular and bizarre in shape that it rationally cannot be
understood as anything other than an effort to segregate voters
based on race.
GA case that reaffirmed Shaw
Using race only to draw a Congressional district was
unconstitutional
Applying the rule laid down in Shaw v. Reno requires strict
scrutiny whenever race is the "overriding, predominant force" in
the redistricting process.
Federal Election Campaign Act of
1971 (FECA)

A Broad Comprehensive Change in Election Law
1. It broadly defined elections to include primaries,
caucuses and conventions, as well as general and special
elections.
2. The Act broadly defined expenditures and contributions.
3. It prohibited promises of patronage.
4. It prohibited contracts between a candidate and any
Federal department or agency.
5. The Act exempted from regulation contributions and
expenditures for non-partisan or non-candidate based
get out the vote and voter registration drives by unions
and corporations.
Federal Election Campaign Act of
1971 (FECA) Continued…
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
It exempted from regulation contributions and
expenditures for voluntary fundraising and its
administration by unions and corporations.
It established caps on the amount individuals could
contribute to their own campaign: Presidential and Vice
Presidential candidates, $50,000 each; Senatorial
candidates, $35,000 each; and House candidates,
$25,000 each.
The Act established caps on television advertising at 10
cents per voter in the last election or $50,000, whichever
was higher.
It established disclosure guidelines for contributions of
$100 or higher.
Expenditure and contribution reports were made due by
March 10 of each year.
Amendments to the FECA (1974)

In light of the Watergate scandal, distrust of
public officials was at a peak.



Even more so than in 1971, the new--and now more
numerous--reformers in Congress pushed for campaign
finance reform.
The 1974 Amendments to the Federal
Election Campaign Act passed quickly and were
signed by President Ford.
The law legitimated Political Action Committees,
changed contribution limits, and established the
Federal Election Commission (FEC).
Amendments to the FECA (1974)

Set Spending Limits
 Total spending limits for Presidential candidates:
$10,000,000 for primaries; $20,000,000 for the general
election; and $2,000,000 for nominating conventions.
 Total spending limits for Senatorial candidate: $100,000
or $.08 per eligible voter, whichever is higher, for
primaries; $150,000 or $.12 per eligible voter, whichever
is higher, for general elections.
 Total spending limits for House candidates: $70,000 each
for primaries and general elections.
Amendments to the FECA (1974)
Continued…


Public Funding for Presidential Races
 It defined a "major party" as one which received at least 25% of
the vote in the last federal election.
 It set up a system by which private gifts to a presidential
candidate would be matched by funds raised through the Long
Act.
Disclosure and Enforcement
 It 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.
 The Act gave the FEC the power of advisory opinions.
 It required full reports of contributions and expenditures to be
filed 10 days before and 30 days after each election.
 It required candidates to set up one campaign banking
headquarters for easy research and accountability.
The Creation of the FEC


In 1975, Congress created the Federal Election
Commission (FEC) to administer and enforce
the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) - the
statute that governs the financing of federal
elections.
The duties of the FEC, which is an independent
regulatory agency, are to disclose campaign
finance information, to enforce the provisions of
the law such as the limits and prohibitions on
contributions, and to oversee the public funding
of Presidential elections.
Buckley v Valeo (1976)

Facts



The issue of campaign contributions came under
scrutiny after the Watergate scandal
The Federal Election Committee set guidelines
and limits on money given to campaigns
 Was this constitutional??
The Court also had to decide whether or not you
can be limited by the amount you can spend on
your OWN personal campaign
 Was this constitutional??
Importance




Yes!
The case upheld limits on campaign spending set
by the FEC
 Today it is $2400 per election per
candidate
No!
Spending your own money on your campaign was
found to be a free speech right.
 Steve Forbes, Mitt Romney, Ross Perot, and
other wealthy Americans have taken advantage
of their personal wealth in their quest for office.
Hard Money/
Individual Contributions


Hard money is money given directly to the
candidates: This is limited by law
Individual Limits
 The Federal Election Commission (FEC) limits
individuals to contributions of $2,400 per
election, per candidate
 For example you could contribute $2,400 in
the primary and another $2,400 in the
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

Soft money was money that was
contributed to political parties with no
limits or rules

Soft money was contributed to campaigns but
NOT directly from the donor
Now banned by the BCRA due to
abuses by the parties
 Soft money was raised and spent outside of
federal election guidelines before BCRA.

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act


The BCRA was passed in 2002
 Also known as the McCainFeingold Act
Banned national political party
committees from accepting or
spending soft money contributions
 The original intent was lost in
loopholes
 Other parts were declared
unconstitutional by the Supreme
Ct. in the Citizens United v FEC
case
527’s
527’s are groups that developed
from the loopholes in the McCainFeingold Act
 Many 527s are run by special
interest groups and used to raise
unlimited amounts of money to
spend on issue advocacy and
voter mobilization.
 They do not give money to any
particular campaign or candidate
thus ARE NOT regulated by the
FEC

The 527 Loophole
This form of soft money is used to pay for
527 ads that do not expressly advocate
the election or defeat of a particular
candidate.
 As long as 527 ads do not use the words
"vote for", "elect", "vote against“… these
ads can be paid for with unregulated
soft money.


Many argue that the huge infusion of
unregulated soft money has “destroyed the
federal campaign laws”.
‘Swiftboating”

On May 5, 2004, the RNC accused
MoveOn.org and others 527’s of
coordinating their efforts with the John
Kerry campaign



http://www.moveon.org/
On August 20, 2004, the John Kerry
campaign accused “Swift Boat
Veterans for Truth” of coordinating
their efforts with the George W. Bush
campaign
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/c
ommercials/2004/any-questions/
Political Action Committees (PAC’s)



PAC’s are private groups organized to
elect or defeat government officials and
promote legislation
A PAC must register six months in
advance, have at least fifty
contributors, and give to at least
five candidates.
 There are over 4,000 PACs
registered with the Federal Election
Commission.
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




PACs may receive up to $5,000 from any one
individual, PAC or party committee per calendar
year.
PACs can give $5,000 to a candidate committee
per election (primary, general or special).
 They can also give up to $15,000 annually to any
national party committee, and $5,000 annually to
any other PAC.
PACS support candidates with campaign money
 ½ sponsored by corporations; 1/10 by unions
 1/3 liberal and 2/3 conservative (2001)
Incumbents get the most PAC money!!
Money Limits and Money Needs
Remember….individuals can give up to
$2300 to a candidate per election cycle but
PACS can give $5,000 to a candidate
 Remember….federal money will match
money raised for presidential campaigns if
a 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!!!

Citizens United v FEC (2010)


Facts of the Case
Citizens United sought an injunction against the
Federal Election Commission to prevent the
application of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
(BCRA) to its film Hillary: The Movie.


In an attempt to regulate "big money" campaign
contributions, the BCRA applied a variety of
restrictions to "electioneering communications.


The Movie expressed opinions about whether Senator
Hilary Rodham Clinton would make a good president.
The BCRA (McCain-Feingold Act) prevents corporations or
labor unions from funding such communication from their
general funds and require the disclosure of donors a
disclaimer when the communication is not authorized by
the candidate it intends to support.
Citizens United argued that its First Amendment
rights had been violated.
Importance

Rules Left in Place




The Court further held that the BCRA's disclosure
requirements as applied to The Movie were constitutional.
The Court held that political speech may be banned based
on the speaker's corporate identity.
The Court reasoned that revealing the identity of the ad’s
sponsor is justified by a "governmental interest" in
providing the "electorate with information" about electionrelated spending resources.
Rule that were Changed


The government may not limit corporate independent
expenditures.
The First Amendment does not allow the government to
impose restrictions on certain on corporations or labor
unions.

Political speech is "indispensable" to a democracy, which is
no less true because the speech comes from a corporation.
Super PACs

Super PACs are a new kind of political
action committee created in July 2010
following of Citizens United
 Technically
they are known as
“independent expenditure-only
committees”
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbertreport-videos/382014/april-14-2011/colbertsuper-pac---trevor-potter
Super PACs


Super PACs may raise unlimited sums of money
from
 Corporations
 Unions
 Associations and individuals
They spend unlimited sums to overtly advocate for
or against political candidates.


Unlike traditional PACs, Super PACs are prohibited from
donating money directly to political candidates.
Super PACs must, however, report their donors to
the Federal Election Commission on a monthly or
quarterly basis -- the Super PAC's choice -- as a
traditional PAC would