Campaign Finance

Congress first banned corporate contributions to federal candidates in the Tillman Act of 1907, but early laws were weakly enforced. After Watergate exposed secret cash contributions, the 1974 amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act set contribution and spending limits, required disclosure, created public financing for presidential campaigns, and established the Federal Election Commission. In Buckley v. Valeo, decided January 30, 1976, the Supreme Court upheld contribution limits and disclosure but struck down limits on independent and candidate spending as restrictions on free speech.

Individuals may give limited amounts, adjusted for inflation, directly to candidates, parties, and political action committees, and all contributions above small amounts must be disclosed. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 banned unlimited soft money contributions to national parties. In Citizens United v. FEC, decided January 21, 2010, the Court held that corporations and unions may spend unlimited amounts on independent political expenditures, and a lower court ruling that year allowed super PACs, which can raise unlimited sums as long as they do not coordinate with candidates. Some nonprofit groups can spend on politics without disclosing their donors, known as dark money.

Spending on federal elections has soared, reaching roughly $15 billion or more in the 2024 cycle, with super PACs and a small number of very wealthy donors playing a growing role, and public financing of presidential campaigns has fallen out of use since 2008. The FEC, which needs four of its six commissioners to act, lost its quorum in 2025, limiting enforcement, and in June 2026, in NRSC v. FEC, the Supreme Court struck down limits on how much parties may spend in coordination with their candidates. Supporters of fewer limits say political spending is protected speech, while critics say big money gives donors outsized influence and fuels public distrust.