Search this section • RSS Feed
| Using Federal Election Commission data on federal candidate fundraising from individuals, parties, and political action committees, we found that the doubling of contribution limits did not deliver the promised benefit of more competitive elections and may be, in part, responsible for several harmful emerging trends. Races did not become more competitive; in fact, incumbents continued to out-raise challengers and win re-election at high rates. | |
| Get Report | |
| Large contributions made by a small fraction of Americans unduly influence who runs for office and who wins elections in the United States. Without personal wealth or access to networks of wealthy contributors, many qualified and credible candidates are locked out of contention for federal office — often before voters have the opportunity to register their preferences or hear competing points of view. | |
| Get Report | |
| Long before voters register their preferences on Election Day, the flow of political money determines which candidates are able to mount viable campaigns for federal office. Providing public incentives for small political contributions could help average Americans play a more meaningful role in influencing who has the resources to run effective campaigns and win public office. | |
| Get Report | |