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.
Daily updates from the press and blogosphere on our issues.
Money in Politics 2009: New Horizons for Reform
May 8, 2009 – 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. You can get details and watch video of the presentations here.
In Doe v. Reed the Supreme Court will decide if the state of Washington can mandate the disclosure of the names of citizens who sign petitions for ballot initiatives. In an amicus brief that supports neither side, the Brennan Center for Justice urges the Supreme Court to craft a resolution to the case without impinging upon existing constitutional doctrine regarding disclosure laws in the sphere of money in politics.
Citizens United v. FEC (Amicus Brief)
The Brennan Center for Justice - serving as counsel for itself and several new media journalists - filed a supplemental amicus curiae brief in Citizens United v. FEC. The brief urged the Supreme Court to preserve landmark precedents that support limits on corporate spending in elections.
Green Party of Connecticut v. Jeffrey Garfield
In 2005, the Connecticut General Assembly became the first state legislature in the nation to pass a full public financing law that applies to its own campaigns. The Brennan Center is helping to defend this system and Connecticut’s ban on campaign contributions from lobbyists and state contractors.
West Virginia Moves on Corporate Campaign Finance Disclosure
West Virginia’s legislature passed a bill requiring public disclosure by corporations on their campaign spending. WV voters will hopefully soon know who is bankrolling political ads, post-Citizens United.
Shareholder Consent is Key in Political Spending
In a Thursday Congressional hearing, corporate law experts debated how best to improve corporate governance. Most of the experts agreed: Current laws don’t protect shareholders.
West Virginia as Corporate Vanguard
The West Virginia House passed HR4646, a bill that would require prior shareholder consent in order for a corporation to spend money on campaigns.
Illustrations by Risko
With Corporations’ New Outsize Voice, Can Shareholders Speak?
New policy proposal based on British law shows congressional leaders how to give corporate shareholders a voice in election spending.
Testimony for the House Subcommittee on Corporate Governance after Citizens United
Testimony submitted 3/11/10 to the Committee on Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
Testimony for the Maryland House of Delegates Ways and Means Committee
On March 9, 2010 Ciara Torres-Spelliscy provided testimony for the Maryland House of Delegates Ways and Means Committee.
Testimony for the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee
On February 24, 2010, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy provided testimony for the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee on the impact Citizens United may have on Maryland’s elections.
Like the Lochner v. New York decision from 1905, Citizens United is similarly driven by a particular brand of conservative ideology to achieve a certain result.
Campaign finance ruling reflects Supreme Court’s growing audacity
The Supreme Court on Thursday upended a century’s worth of campaign finance law. An immediate question raised by the Citizens United decision is whether this will flood elections with suddenly legal corporate money. Less understood but deeply significant is what this shows about the court and its relationship to the Obama administration and Congress.
President Obama on the Supreme Court’s decision on Citizens United
The President makes a practical, powerful (and brief) statement on money in politics in the wake of the Supreme Court decision on Citizens United v. FEC.