The "Abolish Super PACs Act" seeks to limit the influence of large contributions in elections by placing restrictions on contributions to political action committees that make independent expenditures, addressing concerns of corruption and restoring public trust in the electoral process.
Summer Lee
Representative
PA-12
The "Abolish Super PACs Act" seeks to limit the influence of large contributions in federal elections by amending the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to include independent expenditure committees, also known as Super PACs, under the same contribution limits as other political committees. This bill aims to reduce the risk and appearance of corruption, restore public trust in elections, and limit foreign interference by placing reasonable limits on contributions to political action committees that make independent expenditures. The Act defines an "independent expenditure committee" as any political committee that makes independent expenditures totaling $5,000 or more in a calendar year, or contributes $5,000 or more to other independent expenditure committees within a calendar year. These amendments will take effect at the start of the calendar year following the enactment of this legislation.
New Bill Targets Super PACs with Contribution Limits, Sets $5k Threshold
This bill, officially called the "Abolish Super PACs Act," aims to shake up the campaign finance world by putting limits on contributions to so-called Super PACs. It does this by amending the long-standing Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. The core idea, according to the bill text (Section 2), is to tackle the perception – and potential reality – of corruption tied to big money in politics and try to rebuild some public trust in elections.
Capping the Cash Flow
So, how does it actually work? The bill introduces a specific definition for an "independent expenditure committee" – basically, any political group spending $5,000 or more in a year on independent political ads or donating that much to other similar groups (defined in the proposed addition to Section 301). Once a group hits that $5,000 threshold, it gets treated like other political committees under the amended Section 315(a)(1)(C), meaning the currently existing contribution limits that apply to traditional PACs would now also apply to these previously unrestricted groups. The goal here is to curb the unlimited flood of money that has characterized Super PACs since the SpeechNow.org v. FEC decision, which the bill explicitly disagrees with.
Why the Change? Unpacking the 'Why'
The legislation lays out several reasons for this proposed change (Section 2 Findings). It points to the massive growth in spending by these independent groups – citing a jump of over 700% between 2008 and 2020 and billions spent in recent cycles, often funded by a tiny fraction of donors giving huge amounts. The bill argues this reliance on massive donations creates, at minimum, an appearance of quid pro quo corruption, where big donors might expect favors from the candidates they help elect. It also mentions concerns about foreign money potentially slipping into U.S. elections through these channels and argues current laws aren't enough to stop it.
Potential Impacts and Hurdles
If this passes, the biggest shift would obviously be for the Super PACs themselves and their major donors, who could no longer give unlimited amounts. This could potentially level the playing field slightly for candidates who rely more on smaller, grassroots donations. However, there are potential snags. That $5,000 threshold is relatively low; could smaller, genuinely grassroots advocacy groups get unintentionally caught in these regulations, limiting their voice? There's also the elephant in the room: the First Amendment. Limiting contributions, even to independent groups, often sparks legal battles over free speech rights, and this bill would likely face court challenges. Enforcement could also be tricky. These changes wouldn't happen overnight; they'd kick in at the start of the calendar year after the bill becomes law.