Effects of the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

40,984 views
41,333 views

Published on

0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
40,984
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
31
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
29
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Effects of the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

  1. 1. A Center for Responsive Politicsanalysis of the effects of:Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission<br />Report by Spencer MacColl<br />
  2. 2. Outside Spending Rises 338% Since 2006<br />Close up and breakdown by type of committee next two slides…<br />
  3. 3. Citizens United Ruling Allows for Increased Outside Spending<br />Super PACs are a new type of PAC allowed by the Citizen United ruling in 2010<br />In 2008 the Wisconsin Right to Life Supreme Court ruling allowed corporations to use their treasuries to pay for electioneering communications. <br />501c non-profits, funded by individuals, corporations and unions, increased their spending in 2010 thanks to Citizens United allowing them to make independent expenditures<br />*Numbers includes independent expenditures and electioneering communications only<br />
  4. 4. 501c Non-Profits Dominate Electioneering Communication Spending in 2010<br />67% of Total Independent Expenditures in 2010 Came from Groups ‘Freed’ by Citizens United<br />Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life<br />Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission<br />
  5. 5. Spending by Non Disclosing Groups Rises to 47% of Outside Spending<br />Undisclosed donors on the rise…<br />
  6. 6. Corporate Donations on the Rise – Exact Amount Unknown<br />Corporations gave big donations in soft money to national party committees in the 1990s. Soft money was used for get-out-the-vote activities, political advertisements, media buys, polling and other expenditures. <br />After the McCain-Feingold legislation banned corporate donations to political committees in 2002, there was no corporate money until 2008 when corporations could use their treasuries for pay for electioneering communications. In 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations could use their treasuries to also make independent expenditures.<br />In 2010, corporations donated to ‘Super PACs’ that then used the money to make independent expenditures.<br />
  7. 7. 37% of Outside Spending by Unions in 2010 came from Groups Freed by Citizens United<br />*All $ amounts are in millions<br />
  8. 8. Union Money Accounted for 62 Percent of Liberal Outside Spending in 2010<br />*All $ amounts are in millions<br />**All numbers include independent expenditures and electioneering communications only<br />
  9. 9. Conservative Outside Spending Groups: 2004-2010<br />These groups do not disclose <br />their donors<br />*All numbers include independent expenditures and electioneering communications only<br />
  10. 10. Liberal Outside Spending Groups: 2004-2010<br />These groups do not disclose <br />their donors<br />*All numbers include independent expenditures and electioneering communications only<br />
  11. 11. Non-Party Groups Outspend Party Committees in 2010<br />*All numbers include independent expenditures and electioneering communications only<br />*All $ amounts are in millions<br />
  12. 12. Conservatives Take Advantage of Citizens United<br />SUPER PACs<br />UNDISCLOSED DONORS<br />All Non-Party Committee Outside Spending<br />*All numbers include independent expenditures and electioneering communications only – 2010 Election Cycle<br />

×