Political Parties Boast Renewed Influence in Campaign World

Political parties are boasting renewed influence in campaign politics after the Supreme Court struck down decades-old limits on coordinated spending.

The decision in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission this month allows party committees to spend unlimited sums in coordination with campaigns, effectively giving them access to cheaper ad rates reserved for candidates and handing them more power than they’ve had in years to weigh in on individual races.

The key takeaway: After more than 15 years of increasing influence and spending by super PACs and other outside groups, political parties are poised to regain at least some of the leverage that they lost over the past half century.

“After a long, slow defunding of the American political party, the institutions built to be accountable to voters may finally be allowed to compete with the ones that answer to no one,” James E. Tyrrell III, a campaign finance attorney at Dickinson Wright PLLC in Washington, wrote in a recent op-ed published by The Hill.

In the short-term, at least, the Supreme Court’s ruling appears more likely to benefit the GOP than Democrats. The RNC entered June with more than $125 million in the bank and no debt, according to its latest FEC filing. The Democratic National Committee, on the other hand, had less than $15 million on hand – less than the roughly $18.3 million it owes in debt.

Likewise, the GOP’s main campaign arms – the NRSC and the National Republican Congressional Committee – are sitting on more cash than their Democratic counterparts. The NRSC has nearly $48.9 million on hand and the NRCC has about $81.8 million, while the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has $38.8 million in the bank and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has just under $72 million, FEC filings show.

Democrats, overall, also tend to outpace Republicans in small-dollar fundraising, while the GOP tends to rely more on wealthy donors. The Supreme Court’s ruling now makes it easier for those large donors to direct money to campaigns by using party committees as conduits.

The American public is also deeply skeptical of unlimited coordinated spending. A Marquette Law School poll conducted in May – a little more than a month before the Supreme Court announced its decision in the case – found that only 26 percent of U.S. adults agreed with the removal of coordinated spending limits, including only 25 percent of Republicans and 22 percent of Democrats.

But even though Democrats made clear ahead of the Supreme Court ruling that they opposed lifting the coordinating spending caps – the DNC intervened in the case  to defend the constitutionality of the limits – some in the party didn’t meet the decision with a sense of dread.

Nisha Desai, a senior director at Democratic firm VNCS, told Campaigns & Elections during a recent election briefing that Democrats had been prepared for the Supreme Court to knock down the coordinating spending limits and argued that the ruling effectively ensures that both parties are able to “play by the same rules.”

“I think from my point of view, especially having come from the committees, Republicans were already kind of skirting and pushing the limits of coordination rules,” Desai, an alum of the DCCC and the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, said. “So I think while this ruling allows for more money in politics, which I think is not what we need, I think it levels the playing field for Democrats.”