AP US Government & Politics: Elections and Campaign Finance (Citizens United, BCRA, PACs/Super PACs)

AP US Government & Politics – Elections and Campaign Finance (Citizens United, BCRA, PACs/Super PACs)

AP US Government & Politics: Elections and Campaign Finance Study Guide

(Citizens United, BCRA, PACs/Super PACs)

What This Is

This topic covers how money influences U.S. elections—who can donate, how much, and what rules (or lack thereof) govern campaign spending. The AP exam tests your ability to explain campaign finance laws, Supreme Court rulings (like Citizens United), and the role of PACs/Super PACs in elections. Real-world example: In the 2020 election, Super PACs spent $2.1 billion—more than the GDP of some small countries—on ads supporting or attacking candidates, all while legally avoiding direct coordination with campaigns.

Key Terms & Concepts

• Campaign Finance: Money raised and spent to influence elections (ads, staff, travel, etc.).
• Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA, 1971): First major law limiting campaign donations and requiring disclosure. Created the FEC (Federal Election Commission) to enforce rules.
• Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA, 2002, aka "McCain-Feingold"): Banned soft money (unlimited donations to parties) and restricted electioneering communications (ads mentioning candidates right before elections).
• Hard Money: Direct donations to candidates/parties, strictly limited ($2,900 per candidate per election in 2024).
• Soft Money: Unlimited donations to parties for "party-building" (banned by BCRA).
• Independent Expenditures: Spending by groups (PACs, Super PACs) not coordinated with a candidate. Protected as free speech (Buckley v. Valeo, 1976).
• PACs (Political Action Committees): Groups that raise limited money ($5,000 per candidate per election) to donate directly to campaigns or run ads.
• Super PACs: Can raise unlimited money from corporations/unions/individuals but cannot donate directly to candidates. Must operate independently (Citizens United, 2010).
• 501(c)(4) Groups: "Social welfare" nonprofits that can spend on politics but don’t disclose donors ("dark money").
• 527 Groups: Tax-exempt groups that raise money for political activities (e.g., voter mobilization) but cannot expressly advocate for/against a candidate.
• Citizens United v. FEC (2010): Supreme Court ruled that corporations/unions have free speech rights and can spend unlimited money on independent political ads. Struck down BCRA’s ban on corporate electioneering.
• SpeechNow.org v. FEC (2010): D.C. Circuit Court ruled that donations to independent-expenditure groups (Super PACs) cannot be limited, leading to their creation.

Step-by-Step: Analyzing Campaign Finance Scenarios

Use this process for FRQs or multiple-choice questions about campaign finance:

1. Identify the actor: Is it a candidate, PAC, Super PAC, corporation, or individual? Rules differ for each.
2. Check the money type: Is it hard money (limited, disclosed) or independent expenditures (unlimited, disclosed) or dark money (unlimited, undisclosed)?
3. Apply the law:
4. FECA/BCRA: Limits on hard money, bans on soft money.
5. Citizens United: Corporations/unions can spend unlimited on independent ads.
6. SpeechNow: Super PACs can raise unlimited money.
7. Determine coordination: If spending is coordinated with a candidate, it’s a direct donation (limited). If independent, it’s unlimited.
8. Evaluate disclosure: PACs/Super PACs must disclose donors; 501(c)(4)s do not.
9. Conclude impact: How does this spending influence elections? (e.g., more ads, more influence for wealthy donors).

Example: A corporation runs an ad saying "Vote against Candidate X" 30 days before an election. - Step 1: Actor = corporation. - Step 2: Money = independent expenditure (ad, not a donation). - Step 3: Citizens United allows this. - Step 4: No coordination-unlimited spending. - Step 5: Must disclose donors (if a Super PAC) or not (if a 501(c)(4)). - Step 6: Increases corporate influence in elections.

Common Mistakes

• Mistake: Thinking Citizens United allows direct donations from corporations to candidates. Correction: Citizens United only allows independent expenditures (ads not coordinated with campaigns). Direct donations are still banned.

• Mistake: Confusing PACs and Super PACs. Correction: PACs can donate directly to candidates (limited); Super PACs cannot donate directly but can spend unlimited on ads.

• Mistake: Assuming all campaign spending is disclosed. Correction: Dark money (501(c)(4)s) does not disclose donors.

• Mistake: Believing BCRA still bans corporate electioneering. Correction: Citizens United struck down BCRA’s ban on corporate/union electioneering.

• Mistake: Thinking soft money is still legal. Correction: BCRA banned soft money in 2002.

AP Exam Insights

1. FRQ Hot Topic: Expect questions asking you to:
2. Compare PACs vs. Super PACs (donation limits, coordination rules).
3. Explain how Citizens United changed campaign finance (e.g., "How did the ruling increase corporate influence?").

4. Analyze a hypothetical scenario (e.g., "A Super PAC runs an ad for Candidate Y. Is this legal? Why?").

5. Multiple-Choice Traps:

6. Distinguish between hard money, soft money, and independent expenditures.
7. Know which groups disclose donors (PACs/Super PACs = yes; 501(c)(4)s = no).

8. Remember Citizens United applies to corporations/unions, not individuals.

9. Tricky Distinction:

10. Independent expenditures (protected by Citizens United) vs. direct contributions (limited by FECA).

11. 527 groups (can’t expressly advocate for a candidate) vs. Super PACs (can).

12. Common FRQ Task: "Describe two ways Citizens United has influenced elections, and explain one criticism of the ruling."

13. Influence: More corporate/union spending; rise of Super PACs.
14. Criticism: Increases influence of wealthy donors; "corporations aren’t people."

Quick Check Questions

1. Which of the following is a consequence of Citizens United v. FEC? a) Corporations can donate unlimited money directly to candidates. b) Super PACs can coordinate spending with candidates. c) Corporations can spend unlimited money on independent political ads. d) The FEC was abolished. Answer: c) Citizens United allowed unlimited independent expenditures by corporations/unions.

2. How do Super PACs differ from traditional PACs?

3. Super PACs can raise unlimited funds but cannot donate directly to candidates. PACs can donate limited funds directly to candidates. Why? SpeechNow.org (2010) removed limits on donations to independent-expenditure groups.

4. FRQ-Style: "Explain how the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) attempted to reduce the influence of money in elections, and identify one Supreme Court case that weakened its provisions."

5. BCRA’s goal: Banned soft money, restricted electioneering communications.
6. Case: Citizens United v. FEC (2010) struck down BCRA’s ban on corporate electioneering.

Last-Minute Cram Sheet

1. FECA (1971): Created FEC; limited hard money; required disclosure.
2. BCRA (2002): Banned soft money; restricted electioneering communications.
3. Citizens United (2010): Corporations/unions can spend unlimited on independent political ads. Not direct donations!
4. SpeechNow (2010): Led to Super PACs (unlimited donations, no coordination).
5. PACs: Limited donations ($5k/candidate), can donate directly.
6. Super PACs: Unlimited donations, cannot donate directly, must disclose donors.
7. 501(c)(4)s: "Dark money" groups; unlimited spending, no donor disclosure.
8. Hard money: Limited, disclosed donations to candidates.
9. Soft money: Unlimited donations to parties (banned by BCRA).
10. Citizens United does NOT allow direct corporate donations to candidates!