Minnesota Law Review

Note, Blowing Up the Pipes: The Use of (c)(4) to Dismantle Campaign Finance Reform

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, nonprofit organizations originally designed to promote social welfare interests have become the latest loop­hole for political financiers to bypass campaign finance regulations. The federal regime of campaign finance laws—designed to prevent corruption and preserve the integrity of our democratic institutions—is being circumvented by wealthy interests. Donors use these nonprofits, organized under § 501(c)(4) of the tax code, to anonymously inject unlimited amounts of political money into the electoral process. The 2010 midterm election witnessed the largest amount of independent spending from interest groups in a nonpresidential election. Nearly $293 million came from outside interest groups, with at least $138 million from organizations with anonymous donors. These numbers are staggering, and without reform, the Note contends, the political influence of secretive money will only grow in future elections.

The Note examines the rise of § 501(c)(4) nonprofit organizations as a modern tool for bypassing campaign finance regulation and looks critically at case studies from the 2010 midterm elections. After assessing possible avenues for reform, the Note advocates for disclosure and disclaimer requirements as the best option for reforming § 501(c)(4) political activity. Disclosure and disclaimer requirements improve voter confidence in the electoral process, prevent corruption and/or the appearance of corruption, aid in the enforcement of contribution limits, and allow voters to completely evaluate candidates. Although legislation called the DISCLOSE Act failed in the last Congress, the Note argues that similar legislation is both politically feasible and constitutionally sound, and should be passed immediately before future elections further undermine our democratic institutions.

:: View PDF

News & Events

  • Volume 97 Lead Piece Profiled in New York Times

    The Volume 97 Lead Piece, a study of how the Supreme Court treats business interests by distinguished legal scholars Lee Epstein, William M. Landes, and Richard A. Posner, was profiled in the May 5, 2013 edition of the New York Times. The story, titled Corporations Find a Friend in the Supreme Court, [...]

  • Volume 98 Spring Submissions Closed

    The Minnesota Law Review has closed the spring submissions period for Volume 98. Submissions for Volume 98 will reopen on Thursday, August 1. Please see the submissions page for more details.

  • Volume 98 Submissions Will Open Feb. 15

    The Minnesota Law Review will begin accepting submissions for Volume 98 on Friday, February 15, 2013. Please see this page for more details.

  • Minnesota Law Review Announces Volume 98 Editorial Board

    The Minnesota Law Review is pleased to announce its Volume 98 editorial board, headed by Editor in Chief Jake Vandelist.

  • Minnesota Law Review Announces 2013 Symposium Topic

    The Minnesota Law Review is pleased to announce that its 2013 symposium will address the legal and political issues facing organized labor in the United States. The symposium will be held at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 25, 2013.

Newsletter

cforms contact form by delicious:days