Restoring Confidence in Our Democracy Act - Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to set forth special rules for electioneering communications, especially targeted communications, which national banks, corporations, and labor organizations are prohibited from paying for.
Defines "targeted communications" as electioneering communications distributed from a television or radio broadcast station or provider of cable or satellite television service and, in the case of a communication which refers to a candidate for an office other than President or Vice President, is targeted to the relevant electorate.
Prohibits independent expenditures by national banks, corporations, and labor organizations.
Applies certain limitations on contributions made by any person to a political committee to any contribution to a political committee which accepts donations or contributions that do not comply with contribution or source prohibitions (or made to any account of a political committee established to accept such noncompliant donations or contributions).
[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1338 Introduced in House (IH)]
113th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1338
To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to reassert the
authority of Congress to restrict spending by corporations and labor
organizations on campaigns for elections for Federal office, and for
other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 21, 2013
Mr. Dingell (for himself, Mr. Conyers, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New
York, Ms. DeGette, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. Ellison, Mr. Himes, Ms. Edwards,
Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Polis, and Ms. Norton) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on House Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to reassert the
authority of Congress to restrict spending by corporations and labor
organizations on campaigns for elections for Federal office, and for
other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Restoring Confidence in Our
Democracy Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Free and open elections are a founding principle of our
republican form of government.
(2) It is incumbent upon Congress to ensure that elections
in the United States are free of corruption and the appearance
of corruption.
(3) The free flow of money in politics, as exemplified by
the current state of affairs, is corrupting and will distort
and disfigure our democracy.
(4) Excessively high levels of spending on elections is
fundamentally damaging to the public perception of our
government, and threatens the fairness and integrity of our
democracy.
(5) Congress has a constitutional duty to guarantee a
republican form of government for the States.
(6) Spending record sums of money on our elections
threatens the continued existence of our republican form of
government.
(7) Allowing unlimited spending on elections means the
wealthy can crowd out other important voices in our political
debates, thereby giving American citizens fewer sources of
information.
(8) Federalist 52 states that Congress ``ought to be
dependent on the people alone''.
(9) Unlimited spending in our elections violates this
principle and corrupts our government by making elected
officials more dependent on donors than the people.
(10) This ``dependency corruption'' gives the wealthy a
greater say in our democracy than the average citizen, which is
contrary to the intent of the Founding Fathers.
(11) Congress has the inherent power to ensure that
elections for the government are conducted in a fair,
honorable, and proper way to preserve our democracy and ensure
the people have confidence in our elections and system of
government.
(12) Congress has the authority to regulate campaign
expenditures to promote integrity, prevent corruption, and
ensure the public has trust in our election system, going back
to the Tillman Act of 1907, which prohibits corporations from
making direct contributions to political campaigns.
(13) In 1947, Congress passed the Taft-Hartley Act, which
first prohibited corporations and labor unions from making
independent expenditures in support or opposition to candidates
for Federal office.
(14) The Watergate scandal, and the outrageous expenditure
of campaign funds in that scandal, did great damage to public
confidence in government and demanded a legislative response to
restore this confidence.
(15) Congress rewrote the Federal Elections Campaign Act
(FECA) in 1974 as a response to Watergate and public calls for
increased regulation of our campaign system. This law
established the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) and
instituted limits on campaign contributions which remain law to
this day.
(16) In 1976, the Supreme Court issued a decision in the
case of Buckley v. Valeo which first established the principle
that money equals speech, in addition to overturning FECA
limitations on independent expenditures.
(17) The Buckley decision also stated that ``The
constitutional power of Congress to regulate Federal elections
is well established and is not questioned by any of the parties
in this case''.
(18) Equating money with speech can result in the wealthy
having an undue influence on our elections at the expense of
the great majority of the American people.
(19) In 1990, the Supreme Court issued a decision in the
case of Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce which upheld a
Michigan law banning corporations from making independent
expenditures in elections.
(20) In Austin, the Court found that ``Corporate wealth can
unfairly influence elections when it is deployed in the form of
independent expenditures''.
(21) Austin also established that the government has an
anti-distortion interest in regulating political speech. The
Court held that there is a compelling government interest in
preventing ``the corrosive and distorting effects of immense
aggregations of wealth that are accumulated with the help of
the corporate form and that have little or no correlation to
the public's support for the corporation's political ideas''.
(22) In 2002, Congress enacted the Bipartisan Campaign
Reform Act, which among other things banned political parties
from raising so-called ``soft money''.
(23) Spending in presidential elections has risen to
excessive levels over the last decade, which threatens not only
our government, but the integrity of our elections.
(24) In the 2000 presidential election, both of the major
party candidates spent $343.1 million combined. This number
climbed to $717.9 million in the 2004 presidential election.
(25) In the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama's
campaign spent $740.6 million, more than both major party
candidates combined in the previous election.
(26) Following the Supreme Court's decision in the case of
Citizens United v. FEC, there was a massive increase in outside
political spending, which threatens to undermine the legitimacy
of our political system.
(27) The FEC estimates that $7 billion was spent on the
2012 elections.
(28) According to the Wall Street Journal, so-called
``Super PACs'' spent $567,498,628 on the 2012 elections.
(29) Super PACs spent $98 million during the week of
October 29, 2012, alone.
(30) Donations to Super PACs are dominated by the wealthy.
In 2012, 58.9 percent of donations to Super PACs were $1
million or higher, and came from only 159 donors.
(31) Super PACs often accept funds from nonprofits which
are allowed to conceal the source of their donations, thereby
avoiding transparency and greater public scrutiny of their
actions and motivations.
(32) Thirty-one percent of outside spending in the 2012
elections was not able to be traced to its original sources,
which decreases accountability and transparency, threatens
public confidence in our elected officials and our elections,
and has a distorting effect on our elections.
(33) Corporations, now freed to spend as much as they like
to influence elections, accounted for 12 percent of
contributions to Super PACS in 2012, thereby helping to give
corporate interests a greater voice in our political system
than the average Americans.
(34) A January 2012 poll by Rasmussen says that 58 percent
of Americans believe the United States needs new campaign
finance laws.
(35) A January 2012 poll by Democracy Corps found that 55
percent of Americans oppose the Citizens United decision.
Eighty percent of voters also believe there should be limits on
the money spent in campaigns.
(36) An October 2012 poll by Bannon Communications Research
found that 52 percent of Americans are in favor of banning
corporate political spending, 89 percent of Americans believe
there is too much money in politics, and 66 percent believe
that money is the root of all evil in politics.
(37) After considering these findings, Congress is
concerned by the unfairness of unlimited spending in elections
and is taking this action to protect our democracy and our
electoral system.
(38) Reinstituting the ban on corporate political
expenditures and placing a limit on the amount of donations to
Super PACs will help restore faith and trust in our democracy
and will respond to calls by the American people for vigorous
campaign finance reform and effective laws to protect our free
democratic system of elections.
SEC. 3. PROHIBITION OF CORPORATE AND LABOR DISBURSEMENTS FOR
ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS.
(a) Prohibition.--
(1) In general.--Section 316(b)(2) of the Federal Election
Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441b(b)(2)) is amended by
inserting ``or for any applicable electioneering
communication'' before ``, but shall not include''.
(2) Applicable electioneering communication.--Section 316
of such Act (2 U.S.C. 441b) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(c) Rules Relating to Electioneering Communications.--
``(1) Applicable electioneering communication.--For
purposes of this section, the term `applicable electioneering
communication' means an electioneering communication (within
the meaning of section 304(f)(3)) which is made by any entity
described in subsection (a) of this section or by any other
person using funds donated by an entity described in subsection
(a) of this section.
``(2) Exception.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the term
`applicable electioneering communication' does not include a
communication by a section 501(c)(4) organization or a
political organization (as defined in section 527(e)(1) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986) made under section 304(f)(2)(E)
or (F) of this Act if the communication is paid for exclusively
by funds provided directly by individuals who are United States
citizens or nationals or lawfully admitted for permanent
residence (as defined in section 101(a)(20) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20))). For purposes of
the preceding sentence, the term `provided directly by
individuals' does not include funds the source of which is an
entity described in subsection (a) of this section.
``(3) Special operating rules.--
``(A) Definition under paragraph (1).--An
electioneering communication shall be treated as made
by an entity described in subsection (a) if an entity
described in subsection (a) directly or indirectly
disburses any amount for any of the costs of the
communication.
``(B) Exception under paragraph (2).--A section
501(c)(4) organization that derives amounts from
business activities or receives funds from any entity
described in subsection (a) shall be considered to have
paid for any communication out of such amounts unless
such organization paid for the communication out of a
segregated account to which only individuals can
contribute, as described in section 304(f)(2)(E).
``(4) Definitions and rules.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) the term `section 501(c)(4) organization'
means--
``(i) an organization described in section
501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
and exempt from taxation under section 501(a)
of such Code; or
``(ii) an organization which has submitted
an application to the Internal Revenue Service
for determination of its status as an
organization described in clause (i); and
``(B) a person shall be treated as having made a
disbursement if the person has executed a contract to
make the disbursement.
``(5) Coordination with internal revenue code.--Nothing in
this subsection shall be construed to authorize an organization
exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to carry out any activity which is
prohibited under such Code.
``(6) Special rules for targeted communications.--
``(A) Exception does not apply.--Paragraph (2)
shall not apply in the case of a targeted communication
that is made by an organization described in such
paragraph.
``(B) Targeted communication.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A), the term `targeted communication'
means an electioneering communication (as defined in
section 304(f)(3)) that is distributed from a
television or radio broadcast station or provider of
cable or satellite television service and, in the case
of a communication which refers to a candidate for an
office other than President or Vice President, is
targeted to the relevant electorate.
``(C) Definition.--For purposes of this paragraph,
a communication is `targeted to the relevant
electorate' if it meets the requirements described in
section 304(f)(C).''.
(3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall take effect immediately after the enactment of subsection
(b).
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Sections 203 and 204 of the Bipartisan
Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-155) are repealed, and each
provision of law amended by such sections is restored as if such
sections had not been enacted into law.
SEC. 4. PROHIBITION OF INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES BY CORPORATIONS AND
LABOR ORGANIZATIONS.
Section 316(b)(2) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2
U.S.C. 441b(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``includes a contribution or
expenditure,'' and inserting ``includes a contribution or expenditure
(including an independent expenditure),''.
SEC. 5. APPLICATION OF CONTRIBUTION LIMITS AND SOURCE PROHIBITIONS TO
CONTRIBUTIONS MADE TO SUPER PACS.
(a) Application of Limits.--Section 315(a) of the Federal Election
Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)) is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
``(9) For purposes of the limitations imposed by paragraphs (1)(C),
(2)(C), and (3)(B) on the amount of contributions which may be made by
any person to a political committee, a contribution made to a political
committee which accepts donations or contributions that do not comply
with the contribution or source prohibitions under this Act (or made to
any account of a political committee which is established for the
purpose of accepting such donations or contributions) shall be treated
in the same manner as a contribution made to any other political
committee to which such paragraphs apply.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall
apply with respect to contributions made on or after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 6. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act or amendment made by this Act, or the
application of a provision or amendment to any person or circumstance,
is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act and
amendments made by this Act, and the application of the provisions and
amendment to any person or circumstance, shall not be affected by the
holding.
<all>
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Llama 3.2 · runs locally in your browser
Ask anything about this bill. The AI reads the full text to answer.
Enter to send · Shift+Enter for new line