You limited your search to:

 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
Campaign Finance

Campaign Finance

Date: May 25, 2005
Creator: Cantor, Joseph E
Description: Concerns over financing federal elections have become a seemingly perennial aspect of our political system, long centered on the enduring issues of high campaign costs and reliance on interest groups for needed campaign funds. This report discusses campaign finance practices, enduring issues and today’s paramount issues. In addition it presents the Legislative Action in the 108th and 109th Congress, as well as the Congressional efforts to close perceived loopholes in Federal Election Law.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Campaign Finance

Campaign Finance

Date: May 19, 2005
Creator: Cantor, Joseph E
Description: Concerns over financing federal elections have become a seemingly perennial aspect of our political system, long centered on the enduring issues of high campaign costs and reliance on interest groups for needed campaign funds. This report discusses campaign finance practices, enduring issues and today’s paramount issues. In addition it presents the Legislative Action in the 108th and 109th Congress, as well as the Congressional efforts to close perceived loopholes in Federal Election Law.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Campaign Finance: Constitutional and Legal Issues of Soft Money

Campaign Finance: Constitutional and Legal Issues of Soft Money

Date: August 10, 2000
Creator: Whitaker, L. Paige
Description: "Soft money" has become one of the major issues in the area of campaign financing in federal elections. The controversy surrounding this issue is due to the perception that soft money may be the largest loophole in the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). Soft money is broadly defined as funds that are raised and spent according to applicable state laws; that would be impermissible, under the FECA, to spend directly in federal elections and that may have an indirect influence on federal elections. This Issue Brief discusses three major types of soft money: political party soft money, corporate and labor union soft money, and soft money used for issue advocacy communications.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Iraq: Elections and New Government

Iraq: Elections and New Government

Date: April 7, 2005
Creator: Katzman, Kenneth
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
527 Organizations: Reporting Requirements Imposed on Political Organizations after the Enactment of P.L. 106-230

527 Organizations: Reporting Requirements Imposed on Political Organizations after the Enactment of P.L. 106-230

Date: March 19, 2001
Creator: Morris, Marie B.
Description: On July 1, 2000, President Clinton signed H.R. 4762, P.L. 106-230. The law amended the Internal Revenue Code [IRC] to require political organizations described in IRC § 527 to disclose their political activities, if they were not already required to do so by the Federal Election Campaign Act [FECA]. This report summarizes the three major changes made by the law and some of the major responses to the legislation. First, all 527 organizations which expect to have over $25,000 in gross receipts during a taxable year and which are not required to report to the Federal Election Commission [FEC] are required to register with the IRS within 24 hours of their formation, whether they are involved in state, local, or federal elections. Second, 527 issue advocacy organizations, which previously reported neither to the IRS nor the FEC, are required to file regular disclosure statements with the IRS. Third, all 527 organizations with gross receipts in excess of $25,000 per year are required to file annual reports with the IRS. The registration statements, disclosure forms, and annual reports will be made public. H.R. 527 and S. 527 in the 107th Congress would exempt most state and local 527 organizations from the ...
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Judicial Nomination Statistics: U.S. District and Circuit Courts, 1945-1976

Judicial Nomination Statistics: U.S. District and Circuit Courts, 1945-1976

Date: October 22, 2003
Creator: Sollenberger, Mitchel A
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Judicial Nomination Statistics: U.S. District and Circuit Courts, 1977-2003

Judicial Nomination Statistics: U.S. District and Circuit Courts, 1977-2003

Date: August 28, 2003
Creator: Rutkus, Denis Steven & Sollenberger, Mitchel A
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Business and Labor Spending in U.S. Elections

Business and Labor Spending in U.S. Elections

Date: October 28, 1997
Creator: Cantor, Joseph E
Description: Federal election law has long prohibited corporate and union spending in federal elections, but distinctions in statutes and judicial rulings have opened avenues by which these groups have been able to spend money in the electoral process. Business groups make particular use of political action committee (PAC) donations to candidates and soft money donations to parties. Unions made prominent use of issue advocacy in 1996, but labor’s political strength lies in exempt activity communications with members. This report explains these tools and their use in today’s elections.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
State Election Laws: Overview of Statutes Regarding Emergency Election Postponement Within the State

State Election Laws: Overview of Statutes Regarding Emergency Election Postponement Within the State

Date: September 22, 2004
Creator: Whitaker, L. Paige
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Campaign Finance: Brief Overview of

Campaign Finance: Brief Overview of

Date: May 19, 2003
Creator: Whitaker, L. Paige
Description: On May 2, 2003, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued its decision in McConnell v. FEC, striking down many key provisions of the law. This report provides a brief overview of the court’s decision and will be updated. The three-judge panel, which was split 2 to 1 on many issues, ordered that its ruling take effect immediately. Since the court has issued its opinion, several appeals have been filed. Under the BCRA expedited review provision, the court’s decision will be reviewed directly by the U.S. Supreme Court. On May 19 the U.S. district court issued a stay to its ruling, which leaves BCRA, as enacted, in effect until the Supreme Court issues a decision.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department