Abstract

 


 



The Political Parties and Campaign Finance Reform


Richard Briffault


Columbia Law School

April 2000

Columbia Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 012

Abstract:     
The major political parties have blown large and widening holes in federal campaign finance law. The most significant party practices ? independent expenditures, soft money fundraising, and issue advocacy ? map on to the fault lines central to the constitutional law of campaign finance ? so that limiting these party activities raises important constitutional question. Indeed, in Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v FEC, a Supreme Court plurality determined that parties, like PACs, may engage in expenditures that are independent of their candidates and, thus, not subject to the limits on party contributions to candidates. So, too, several justices and some political scientists have questioned whether a party's support for its candidates even raises the danger of corruption which is a sine qua non for regulating campaign finance activity.

This Article argues that parties are not like other political committees, such as PACs, and that their finance practices do trigger the corruption concern central to the Buckley doctrine. Due to the close structural connection between parties and their candidates, the overarching concern of the major parties with winning elections and wielding power in government, and the ability of large donors to use contributions to party committees to influence government action, the major parties should be constitutionally more easy to regulate -- not more difficult -- than other political organizations.

The Article explains why restrictions on concerning party independent expenditures, party issue advocacy, and soft money fundraising are constitutionally sound, and it presents specific proposals for limiting party fundraising and spending that would be constitutional if the doctrinal distinctions the Supreme Court has drawn are interpreted in light of the particular relationships of party committees, party candidates, and party donors.

These proposals are not anti-party but pro-campaign finance reform. Due to their roles of supporting challengers, focusing on grass-roots political activity, and combining and thereby partially diluting multiple special interest groups, the parties play a positive role in our political system. Indeed, I will suggest that once party money is subject to effective regulation, increasing the money the parties are allowed to spend in support of their candidates would actually be desirable. But unlimited contributions to, and unlimited spending by, the parties jeopardize the anti-corruption values at the heart of campaign finance law. Unless party money is subject to effective limits, campaign finance reform is doomed to failure.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 62

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: May 10, 2000  

Suggested Citation

Briffault, Richard , The Political Parties and Campaign Finance Reform (April 2000). Columbia Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 012. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=223729 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.223729

Contact Information

Richard Briffault (Contact Author)
Columbia Law School ( email )
435 West 116th Street
New York, NY 10025
United States
212-854-2638 (Phone)
212-854-7946 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,177
Downloads: 396
Download Rank: 34,889

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.891 seconds