Reforming Money in Politics

A Long Struggle

Campaign finance reform has a long and largely frustrating history. The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 and its 1974 amendments (passed after Watergate) created the modern regulatory framework: contribution limits, disclosure requirements, and the FEC. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (McCain-Feingold) banned 'soft money' donations to parties and restricted certain political ads near elections.

Citizens United overturned key provisions of both laws. Since 2010, reform efforts have largely stalled at the federal level. A constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United has been proposed repeatedly but would require two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of state legislatures — effectively impossible in the current political environment.

What Might Work

Despite federal gridlock, several reform approaches show promise. Small-donor matching — where public funds multiply small contributions (e.g., 6:1 matching for donations under $200) — has been adopted in New York City and several other jurisdictions. It amplifies the voice of ordinary donors without restricting spending.

Disclosure requirements enjoy broad bipartisan support in polling. The DISCLOSE Act, which would require disclosure of all significant political donations, has passed the House multiple times but been blocked in the Senate.

State and local action has been more successful: several states have enacted their own disclosure laws, public financing programs, and anti-corruption measures that go beyond federal requirements.

Fifty Years in One Table

Read top to bottom, the table tells a story of reform and counter-reform: every legislative tightening (1971, 1974, 2002) has been met by a judicial loosening (1976, 2010). The persistent obstacle is Buckley's core holding that spending is speech, which keeps striking down the caps reformers most want.