ChAPTER EighT • CAmPAigns AnD ElECTions 177
Issue Advocacy
Advertising
Advertising paid for
by interest groups that
support or oppose a
candidate or a candidate’s
position on an issue
without mentioning the
candidate, voting, or
elections.
Soft Money
Campaign contributions
unregulated by federal or
state law, usually given
to parties and party
committees to help fund
general party activities.
Independent
Expenditures
Unregulated political
expenditures by PACs,
organizations, and
individuals that are
not coordinated with
candidate campaigns or
political parties.issue Advocacy Advertising. Business corporations, labor unions, and other interest
groups have also developed ways of making independent expenditures that are not coor-
dinated with those of a candidate or political party. A common tactic is issue advocacy
advertising, which promotes positions on issues rather than candidates. Although pro-
moting issue positions aligns very closely with promoting candidates who support those
positions, the courts repeatedly have held that interest groups have a First Amendment
right to advocate their positions.soft money. Interest groups and PACs hit upon the additional strategy of generating
soft money—that is, campaign contributions to political parties that escaped the limits
of federal or state election law. No limits existed on contributions to political parties or
party committees for activities such as voter education and voter-registration drives. This
loophole enabled the parties to raise millions of dollars from corporations and individuals.The Rise and Fall of the mcCain-Feingold Act. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
of 2002, also known as the McCain-Feingold Act after its chief sponsors in the Senate,
took effect on the day after the midterm elections of 2002. The law sought to regulate
the new campaign-finance practices developed since the passage of the FECA. It banned
soft money at the federal level, but it did not ban such contributions to state and local
parties. It attempted to curb issue advocacy advertising, but also increased the sums that
individuals could contribute directly to candidates.
The constitutionality of the 2002 act was immediately challenged. In December 2003,
the Supreme Court upheld almost all of the clauses of the act.^5 In 2007, however, the
Court eased the act’s restrictions on issue advocacy ads when it ruled that only those ads
“susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against
a specific candidate” could be restricted prior to an election.^6 Finally, in 2010, Citizens
United v. FEC^7 swept away almost all remaining restrictions on independent expenditures,
leading to the system we have today.The Current Campaign
Finance Environment
As of 2012, political campaigns are financed in
two distinct ways. One of these is spending by the
candidate’s own committee. Contributions made
directly to the candidate’s committee are subject
to limitations: an individual can donate no more
than $2,500 to a candidate in a single election,
and contributions by committees are limited as
well. In exchange for these limits, candidates have
almost complete control over how their own cam-
paign money is spent.
Another way in which campaigns are financed
is through independent expenditures. These
funds may be spent on advertising and other
political activities, but in theory the expenditures- McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93 (2003).
- FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, 551 U.S. 449 (2007).
- 130 S.Ct. 876 (2010).
Karl Rove, left, former political adviser to President George
W. Bush, speaks with senator Orrin Hatch at the 2012 Republican
National Convention. That year, Rove headed the Crossroads super
PAC, which spent large sums with modest results. (Chip Somodevilla/
Getty Images)Copyright 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.