The Commission was given jurisdiction in civil enforcement matters, authority to write regulations and responsibility for monitoring compliance with the FECA. Additionally, the amendments transferred from GAO to the Commission the function of serving as a national clearinghouse for information on the administration of elections.
Under the amendments, the President, the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate each appointed two of the six voting Commissioners. The Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House were designated nonvoting, exofficio Commissioners. The first Commissioners were sworn in on April 14, The amendments also completed the system currently used for the public financing of Presidential elections. The amendments provided for partial Federal funding, in the form of matching funds, for Presidential primary candidates and also extended public funding to political parties to finance their Presidential nominating conventions.
Complementing these provisions, Congress also enacted strict limits on both contributions and expenditures. These limits applied to all candidates for Federal office and to political committees influencing Federal elections. Another amendment relaxed a prohibition on contributions from Federal government contractors. Key provisions of the amendments were immediately challenged as unconstitutional in a lawsuit filed by Senator James L. The Supreme Court handed down its ruling on January 30, Buckley v.
Valeo , U. The Court upheld contribution limits because they served the government's interest in safeguarding the integrity of elections. However, the Court overturned the expenditure limits, stating: "It is clear that a primary effect of these expenditure limitations is to restrict the quantity of campaign speech by individuals, groups and candidates. The restrictions.
The Court also sustained other provisions of the public funding law and upheld disclosure and recordkeeping requirements. The Federal Election Campaign Act established disclosure reporting requirements for candidate committees, political party committees, and political action committees participating in federal election activities.
Although reporting schedules and thresholds have been adjusted by subsequent legislation, the basic disclosure structure introduced in the Federal Election Campaign Act remains in force to the present day. For year-specific and committee-specific disclosure requirements, consult the Federal Election Commission 's website. The Federal Election Campaign Act also "provided the basic legislative framework for separate segregated funds," more commonly known as political action committees.
Although the law prohibits corporations and unions from making direct contributions to federal candidates, it allows a group to "establish, operate and solicit voluntary contributions for the organization's" political action committee. These funds can then in turn be used in federal elections. In the aftermath of the Watergate scandal, Congress approved a series of significant amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act. Perhaps most notably, these amendments created the Federal Election Commission.
Congress vested the commission with the authority to "administer and enforce the Federal Election Campaign Act. No more than three members of the commission can belong to the same political party, and at least four votes are required "for any official commission action. In addition, the amendments established contribution and spending limits. In , the Supreme Court ruled in Buckley v. Valeo that spending limits violated the First Amendment of the Constitution ; the court held that contribution limits, however, were constitutional.
The Federal Election Campaign Act was further amended in in light of the high court's ruling in Buckley v. On January 30, , the Supreme Court ruled in Buckley v. Valeo that political campaign spending limits violated the First Amendment of the Constitution.
The court held that limits on campaign contributions "served the government's interest in safeguarding the integrity of elections.
The court decided the case , with one justice abstaining. According to the Congressional Research Service, "by the s, attention began to shift to perceived loopholes" in the Federal Election Campaign Act. As enacted, the law prohibited national political parties, federal candidates, and officeholders from soliciting soft money contributions in federal elections.
The law also barred corporations and unions from using their treasury funds to finance electioneering communications, which are defined as "broadcast ads referring to clearly identified federal candidates within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary election or caucus.
Federal Election Commission that this latter provision was unconstitutional. On April 2, , the Supreme Court ruled that biennial aggregate contribution limits were unconstitutional. The Federal Campaign Act of and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act imposed biennial aggregate contribution limits on campaign donors, limiting the total amount donors could contribute to federal candidates in a two-year election cycle.
In a decision, the court struck down this cap. Chief Justice John Roberts , writing for the court's majority, reaffirmed the federal government's right to place certain limits on campaign contributions "to protect against corruption or the appearance of corruption.
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Federal Election Campaign Act. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles. Federal Election Commission. CFI follows these developments with great interest. However, the CFI website is not the best place for a user to find primary source documents for the legal details.
Instead, we are happy to provide links to other good websites. There you will find explanations and full texts of the law and regulations, as well as good primary source collections of court cases, legal briefs, and and other supporting documents.
0コメント