Categorization Political action committee

1 categorization

1.1 connected pacs
1.2 non-connected pacs

1.2.1 leadership pacs
1.2.2 controversial use of leadership pacs


1.3 super pacs

1.3.1 2012 presidential election
1.3.2 2016 presidential election
1.3.3 disclosure rules

categorization

federal law formally allows 2 types of pacs: connected , non-connected. judicial decisions added third classification, independent-expenditure committees, colloquially known super pacs .

connected pacs

most of 4,600 active, registered pacs connected pacs established businesses, labor unions, trade groups, or health organizations. these pacs receive , raise money restricted class , consisting of managers , shareholders in case of corporation , members in case of union or other interest group. of january 2009, there 1,598 registered corporate pacs, 272 related labor unions , 995 trade organizations.

non-connected pacs

groups ideological mission, single-issue groups, , members of congress , other political leaders may form non-connected pacs . these organizations may accept funds individual, connected pac, or organization. of january 2009, there 1,594 non-connected pacs, fastest-growing category.

leadership pacs

elected officials , political parties cannot give more federal limit directly candidates. however, can set leadership pac makes independent expenditures. provided expenditure not coordinated other candidate, type of spending not limited.

under fec (federal election commission) rules, leadership pacs non-connected pacs, , can accept donations individuals , other pacs. since current officeholders have easier time attracting contributions, leadership pacs way dominant parties can capture seats other parties. leadership pac sponsored elected official cannot use funds support official s own campaign. however, may fund travel, administrative expenses, consultants, polling, , other non-campaign expenses.

between 2008 , 2009, leadership pacs raised , spent more $47 million.

controversial use of leadership pacs

former rep. john doolittle s (r) leadership pac paid 15% firm employed wife. payouts wife s firm $68,630 in 2003 , 2004, , $224,000 in 2005 , 2006. doolittle home raided in 2007. after years of investigation, justice department dropped case no charges in june 2010.
one leadership pac purchased $2,139 in gifts bose corporation.
former rep. richard pombo (r) used leadership pac pay hotel bills ($22,896) , buy baseball tickets ($320) donors.
former speaker nancy pelosi s (d) leadership pac, team majority, fined $21,000 federal election officials improperly accepting donations on federal limits.

super pacs

super pacs, officially known independent-expenditure committees , may not make contributions candidate campaigns or parties, may engage in unlimited political spending independently of campaigns. unlike traditional pacs, can raise funds individuals, corporations, unions, , other groups without legal limit on donation size.

super pacs made possible 2 judicial decisions: aforementioned citizens united v. federal election commission and, 2 months later, speechnow.org v. fec. in speechnow.org, federal court of appeals d.c. circuit held pacs did not make contributions candidates, parties, or other pacs accept unlimited contributions individuals, unions, , corporations (both profit , not-for-profit) purpose of making independent expenditures.

the result of citizens united , speechnow.org decisions rise of new type of political action committee in 2010, popularly dubbed super pac . in open meeting on july 22, 2010, fec approved 2 advisory opinions modify fec policy in accordance legal decisions. these advisory opinions issued in response requests 2 existing pacs, club growth, , commonsense ten, later became senate majority pac. opinions gave sample wording letter super pacs must submit qualify deregulated status, , such letters continue used super pacs present date. fec chairman steven t. walther dissented on both opinions , issued statement giving thoughts. in statement, walther stated there provisions of act , commission regulations not addressed court in speechnow continue prohibit commonsense ten soliciting or accepting contributions political committees in excess of $5,000 annually or contributions corporations or labor organizations. (emphasis in original)

the term super pac coined reporter eliza newlin carney. according politico, carney, staff writer covering lobbying , influence cq roll call, made first identifiable, published reference super pac it’s known today while working @ national journal, writing on june 26, 2010, of group called workers’ voices, kind of super pac become increasingly popular in post-citizens united world.

according fec advisories, super pacs not allowed coordinate directly candidates or political parties. restriction intended prevent them operating campaigns complement or parallel of candidates support or engaging in negotiations result in quid pro quo bargaining between donors pac , candidate or officeholder. however, legal candidates , super pac managers discuss campaign strategy , tactics through media.

2012 presidential election

super pacs may support particular candidacies. in 2012 presidential election, super pacs played major role, spending more candidates election campaigns in republican primaries. of april 2012, restore our future—a super pac described having been created mitt romney s presidential campaign—had spent $40 million. winning our future (a pro–newt gingrich group) spent $16 million. super pacs run or advised candidate s former staff or associates.

in 2012 election campaign, of money given super pacs came wealthy individuals, not corporations. according data center responsive politics, top 100 individual super pac donors in 2011–2012 made 3.7% of contributors, accounted more 80% of total money raised, while less 0.5% of money given active super pacs donated publicly traded corporations. super pacs have been criticized relying heavily on negative ads.

as of february 2012, according center responsive politics, 313 groups organized super pacs had received $98,650,993 , spent $46,191,479. means in 2012 election cycle, pacs had exceeded total receipts of 2008. leading super pac on own raised more money combined total spent top 9 pacs in 2008 cycle.

the 2012 figures not include funds raised state level pacs.

2016 presidential election
disclosure rules

by january 2010, @ least 38 states , federal government required disclosure or independent expenditures or electioneering communications. these disclosures intended deter potentially or seemingly corrupting donations.

yet despite disclosure rules, possible spend money without voters knowing identities of donors before election. in federal elections, example, political action committees have option choose file reports on monthly or quarterly basis. allows funds raised pacs in final days of election spent , votes cast before report due.

in 1 high-profile case, donor super pac kept name hidden using llc formed purpose of hiding personal name. 1 super pac, listed $250,000 donation llc no 1 find, led subsequent filing secret donors revealed. however, campaign finance experts have argued tactic illegal, since constitute contribution in name of another.