• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Shop
  • Jobs Board
Campaigns & Elections logo

Campaigns & Elections

  • Subscribe
  • My Account
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Articles
    • Industry News
    • CampaignTech
    • Creative
  • Videos
  • Buyer’s Guide
  • Reports
  • Expert Database
  • Events
  • Awards
    • Reed Awards
    • CampaignTech Awards
    • Rising Stars
  • Consultant Directory
  • Become a Member
  • Shop
  • Job Board
  • Subscribe
  • My Account
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

McCutcheon could boost candidates, parties  

The Supreme Court’s McCutcheon v. FEC ruling has already been labeled a “disaster” and “scarier than Citizens United” by some reform groups. But for candidates and the national parties, who were marginalized four years ago by Citizens, it may be a boon.

The court’s decision to lift the aggregate contribution limits for individuals to candidates and national parties mean that major donors can now max out contributions of $32,400 to the three national committees of each party and aren’t bound by the aggregate biennial limit of $48,600 to candidates. Previously, they were limited to an aggregate limit of $123,200, of which only $74,600 could go to PACs and parties.

“The real winners will be national party committees,” says Neil Reiff, a campaign finance attorney at Sandler, Reiff, Young & Lamb. “It’s been the national committees who are able to find and cultivate these larger donors. If an individual wants to triple max each year to the three national committees, that is $194,400 for the two-year cycle, way more than the aggregate limit.”  

As there were only about 650 rainmakers making contributions at that level last year, says Kirsten Borman, a GOP fundraising consultant, “this doesn’t affect a huge segment of the donor population.” 

Subscribe for Industry News Plus the Latest in Campaign Strategy & Tactics

Hidden
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

But it does change how the many candidates who chased these big donors operate.

“While normally there is a ‘race’ amongst certain candidates and elected officials to secure large contributions from these ultra-wealthy, mega-donors before they hit their biannual limits, that necessity will be gone,” she says. “With increased freedom for donors to give as they desire, we’ll likely see donors give to more candidates instead of Super PACs and other entities.”

With more money on the table, candidates will be spending more time soliciting, which means more time dialing for dollars. 

“Candidates will have more call time,” says Lisa Wagner, an Illinois-based fundraising consultant. “Now donors have no reason they can’t give.”

Share:
FacebookTweetLinkedIn
Filed Under:
Fundraising

Primary Sidebar

By
Sean J. Miller
04/02/2014 12:00 AM EDT
FacebookTweetLinkedIn

C&E Creative Summit 2023 Countdown:

Get Tickets

Most Read

  • Digital Organizing

    How Digital Can Help Thread the Needle in Virginia

  • Sponsored

    Combine Digital Advertising With Direct Mail, The SMART Way

  • Sponsored

    Political Comms Is The Premium Peer-To-Peer Texting Platform

Subscribe for Industry News Plus the Latest in Campaign Strategy & Tactics

Hidden
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Become a member and get access to exclusive content.

Join Today

Footer

Upcoming Events

  • September 21

    Campaigns & Elections Creative Summit

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

For the latest in campaign strategy & tactics plus industry news and analysis, subscribe for free today.

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Follow us

Follow Campaign and Elections for more daily content.

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Contact

Copyright © 2023 Political World Communications, LLC

Advertisement

Subscribe for Industry News Plus the Latest in Campaign Strategy & Tactics

Hidden
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.