Campaign Finance Reform
Campaign finance laws can be crafted to promote more open, honest, and accountable government and to bring the constitutional ideal of political equality closer to reality. The Brennan Center supports disclosure requirements that inform voters about potential influences on elected officials, contribution limits that help to mitigate the real and perceived influence of donors on those officials, and public funding that preserves the significance of voters' voices in the political process and levels the playing field among serious candidates, regardless of their wealth or wealthy connections. A combination of well-crafted reforms, including public funding of judicial, legislative, and executive elections, could enhance the speech of millions of Americans who today are locked out of true political participation. The Brennan Center defends federal, state, and local campaign finance and public funding laws in courts across the country. We also give legal guidance and support to state and local campaign finance reformers through informative publications, direct counseling, legislative drafting, and testimony in support of reform proposals.
Money in Politics 2009: New Horizons for Reform
May 8 – The Brennan Center hosted "Money in Politics 2009: New Horizons for Reform," a one-day conference focused on campaign finance reform. Lawrence Lessig, Micah Sifry, Sam Waterston, and a host of others participated in the lively event. Over time, the Center plans to post videos, photos and additional materials from the conference here.
The Brennan Center filed a brief amici curiae in Sampson v. Buescher defending Colorado’s reporting and registration requirements for ballot issue committees.
Republican National Committee v. Federal Election Comission
The Brennan Center filed a brief amici curiae in Republican National Committee v. FEC defending the limits on raising and spending “soft money” imposed by the Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA).
The Brennan Center is intervening to help defend the nation’s first voluntary full public financing program for judicial elections.
Caperton Sparks Debate About Money in Judicial Elections
Linda Greenhouse and Rick Hasen weigh in on James Sample’s post about Caperton and the role of big money in judicial elections. Originally posted on the Election Law Blog.
Texas Chief Justice Tom Phillips, Linda Greenhouse writes, “suggests that very little will come of Caperton in the end . . .” This argument mischaracterizes Phillips’ views, and undermines the significance of Caperton.
The “Phantom Menace:” A Campaign Finance Prequel
How will the impending Supreme Court decision on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission affect the relationship between new media and campaign finance law?
Illustrations by Risko
Stakes Increase in Citizens United Case
The Supreme Court was expected to issue a long-anticipated decision in Citizen United today, but instead will hear new oral arguments on the case in September 2009.The two questions the Court asked parties to address at the new oral argument are:
BC | Fair Elections Now Act Would Break Special Interest Grip on Congress
Brennan Center release. Bipartisan bill introduced introduced in both houses of Congress. The proposal would provide qualified congressional candidates Fair Elections funding to run a viable campaign in exchange for agreeing to take no contribution larger than $100.
Fair Elections Now Act Would Break Special Interest Grip on Congress
Bipartisan bill introduced introduced in both houses of Congress. The proposal would provide qualified congressional candidates Fair Elections funding to run a viable campaign in exchange for agreeing to take no contribution larger than $100.
Brennan Center Testimony for the New York Senate Elections Committee
On June 3, 2009, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy provided testimony for the New York Senate Elections Committee on New York State’s campaign finance problems and some of the constitutional issues related to campaign finance regulations
Letter to Chair Elizabeth Warren Regarding TARP Transparency
Letter from the Brennan Center to Chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel Elizabeth Warren regarding TARP transparency and the potential use of taxpayer funds for political purposes, including campaign expenditures and lobbying.
Statement for the Illinois Reform Commission
The Brennan Center prepared a set of remarks for the Illinois Reform Commission concerning the constitutionality of contribution limits, voluntary spending limits, and limits on corporate independent expenditures and electioneering communications.
The Impact of FEC v. WRTL II on State Regulation
The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law repeatedly has been asked to explain what the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2652 (2007) (“WRTL II”), means for state regulation of electioneering communications.
Illinois Has Much to Teach PA.
Op-ed notes the Blagojevich debacle should be a warning to other states.
Another Clear Victory for Good Government: NYC’s Law Banning Pay-to-Play Found Constitutional
Recently, two federal courts upheld pay-to-play regulations in Connecticut and New York City, respectively, finding the laws to be constitutional. The Center applauds these victories and the courts’ recognition of important measures that break the nexus between corrupting campaign contributions and elected officials.