In the United States, political action committees (PACs) allow individuals to band together to contribute money to candidates. Federal law never actually mentions political action committees, which it instead refers to as multi-candidate political committees. Such a committee must have at least fifty-one members, have been registered with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for at least six months, and must contribute to at least five candidates. Such a committee may collect up to $5,000 from any individual per campaign cycle and may give $5,000 per candidate per campaign. PACs may be nonconnected, or they may be sponsored by another organization, such as a corporation, trade association, or labor union; however, corporate treasury funds and union dues may not be contributed to a PAC.
Political action committees arose as a means to circumvent restrictions on political contributions by corporations and labor unions. In the late nineteenth century, political parties became increasingly dependent upon big business for financing electoral activity, which led to calls for reform. The Tillman Act of 1907 and the Federal Corrupt Practices Act of 1925 both banned corporate contributions to federal campaigns; neither law had much effect, as corporations found numerous ways around them. During the New Deal era, labor unions became major financial supporters of Franklin Roosevelt and the Democratic Party, and in 1943, Congress passed the War Labor Disputes Act—usually known as “Smith-Connally” after its sponsors—which forbade direct contributions by labor unions to federal campaigns.
In order to circumvent Smith-Connally, the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), the more politicized of the nation’s two labor federations, created the CIO Political Action Committee, which could solicit contributions from union members. Soon, the American Federation of Labor (AFL) founded its own PAC, and by 1968, there were thirty-seven labor PACs, spending $7.1 million in that year’s elections.
Few corporations found it advantageous to create political action committees, but this changed dramatically in the 1970s because of the actions of organized labor. A federal court decision, the so-called Pipefitters case, threatened unions’ ability to operate PACs. Organized labor persuaded Congress to add provisions to the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1971 that formally recognized the right of corporations and labor unions to form political action committees. FECA and the Supreme Court’s overturning of the Pipefitters decision led to a boom in corporation PAC formation. After the fundraising abuses of the Nixon campaign of 1972, Congress revisited FECA in 1974, restricting individual contributions to $1,000 per candidate per campaign. Donors could give up to $5,000 to PACs, which could, in turn, give the same amount to candidates. In 1975, the Federal Election Commission informed Sun Oil that it could use corporate treasury funds to pay for the administrative and overhead costs of its PAC, and this action accelerated the PAC explosion, particularly among corporations. From 1974 to 1986, the number of PACs almost quadrupled, from 1,146 to 4,157 and their contributions surged from $12.5 million to $105 million. Since then, the number of PACs has leveled off, but contributions continue to grow. According to the FEC, PACs contributed about $310 million to federal candidates in the 2003 to 2004 cycle. In recent years, PACs have contributed about one-quarter of all funding for congressional campaigns; about two-thirds of such contributions come from PACs sponsored by corporations or trade associations.
PACs may pursue either legislative strategies, using contributions as an adjunct to lobbying, or electoral strategies, using contributions to sway the results of elections. Most PACs pursue legislative strategies, courting influential incumbents, such as party leaders or committee chairmen. PACs sponsored by corporations and trade associations usually follow such a path, and they tend to favor Republicans, though not overwhelmingly.
Labor and ideological PACs typically pursue electoral strategies, concentrating their giving in close races, and often giving to challengers. They also usually favor candidates of one party—unions contribute almost exclusively to Democrats. Members of Congress often operate leadership PACs, which allow them to contribute to other officeholders and party committees, employ staff, and fund travel. Lobbyists may give to leadership PACs as a means to court powerful legislators.
Many journalists and reformers have alleged that PACs buy Congress votes, but political science research has mostly found such claims to be overblown. PACs tend to reward friends, rather than seek converts. Compared with the influence of party, ideology, and constituency opinion, the effect of PAC donations appears to be slight—but not nonexistent. It appears to be greatest on narrow, technical issues, such as provisions of the tax code or government contracts, that do not cut along partisan lines or arouse the feelings of voters, but which may be critical to a corporation or trade association. Above all, PAC contributions help lobbyists establish the relationships that can give them the necessary access to make their case to legislators or staff.
Bibliography:
- Corrado, Anthony, Thomas E. Mann, Daniel R. Ortiz, and Trevor Potter. The New Campaign Finance Sourcebook. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2005.
- Currinder, Marian, Joanne Connor Green, and M. Margaret Conway. “Interest Group Money in Elections.” In Interest Group Politics. 7th ed., edited by Allan J. Cigler and Burdett Loomis.Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2007.
- Handler, Edward, and John R. Mulkern. Business in Politics: Strategies of Corporate Political Action Committees. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1992.
- Rozell, Mark J., Clyde Wilcox, and David Madland. Interest Groups in American Campaigns:The New Face of Electioneering. 2nd ed.Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2006.
- Sabato, Larry J. PAC Power: Inside the World of Political Action Committees. New York:W.W. Norton, 1985.
- Wright, John R. Interest Groups and Congress: Lobbying, Contributions, and Influence. New York: Longman, 2003.
This example Political Action Committee (PAC) Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.
See also:
- How to Write a Political Science Essay
- Political Science Essay Topics
- Political Science Essay Examples