Super PAC

File:Reject Super PAC Support 49717389.png post made by Elizabeth Warren during her 2020 presidential campaign criticizing Super PACs]]

Super PACs were made possible by two judicial decisions in 2010: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and, two months later, Speechnow.org v. FEC. In Speechnow.org, the federal Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that PACs that did not make contributions to candidates, parties, or other PACs could accept unlimited contributions from individuals, unions, and corporations (both for profit and not-for-profit) for the purpose of making independent expenditures.

The result of the Citizens United and SpeechNow.org decisions was the rise of a new type of political action committee in 2010, popularly dubbed the "super PAC".{{Cite news |last=Cordes |first=Nancy |author-link=Nancy Cordes |date=June 30, 2011 |title=Colbert gets a Super PAC; So what are they? |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colbert-gets-a-super-pac-so-what-are-they/ |access-date=2011-08-11 |work=CBS News}} In an open meeting on July 22, 2010, the FEC approved two Advisory Opinions to modify FEC policy in accordance with the legal decisions.{{Cite web |date=July 22, 2010 |title=FEC Approves Two Advisory Opinions On Independent Expenditure-Only Political Committees |url=http://www.fec.gov/press/press2010/20100722OpenMtng.shtml |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304035832/http://www.fec.gov/press/press2010/20100722OpenMtng.shtml |archive-date=4 March 2016 |access-date=13 January 2016 |website=FEC}} These Advisory Opinions were issued in response to requests from two existing PACs, the conservative Club for Growth, and the liberal Commonsense Ten (later renamed Senate Majority PAC). Their advisory opinions gave a sample wording letter which all super PACs must submit to qualify for the deregulated status, and such letters continue to be used by super PACs up to the present date. FEC Chairman Steven T. Walther dissented on both opinions and issued a statement giving his thoughts. In the statement, Walther stated "There are provisions of the Act and Commission regulations not addressed by the court in SpeechNow that continue to prohibit Commonsense Ten from soliciting or accepting contributions from political committees in excess of $5,000 annually or any contributions from corporations or labor organizations" (emphasis in original).{{Cite web |date=July 20, 2010 |title=Advisory Opinion: Statement of Commissioner Steven T. Walther |url=http://saos.fec.gov/aodocs/1144645.pdf |website=FEC}}

The term "super PAC" was coined by reporter Eliza Newlin Carney.{{Cite web |last=Corley |first=Matt |date=March 14, 2012 |title=Political Scientist Morris Fiorina Used The Term Super PAC In 2002 |url=http://mattcorley.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/morris-fiorina-super-pac-2002/ |website=Component Parts}} According to Politico, Carney, a staff writer covering lobbying and influence for CQ Roll Call, "made the first identifiable, published reference to 'super PAC' as it's known today while working at National Journal, writing on June 26, 2010, of a group called Workers' Voices, that it was a kind of "'super PAC' that could become increasingly popular in the post-Citizens United world."{{Cite web |last=Levinthal |first=Dave |date=January 10, 2012 |title=Genesis of a super name |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71285.html |website=Politico}}

According to FEC advisories, super PACs are not allowed to coordinate directly with candidates or political parties. This restriction is intended to prevent them from operating campaigns that complement or parallel those of the candidates they support or engaging in negotiations that could result in quid pro quo bargaining between donors to the PAC and the candidate or officeholder. However, it is legal for candidates and super PAC managers to discuss campaign strategy and tactics through the media.{{Cite web |last=Grier |first=Peter |date=January 18, 2012 |title=Will Jon Stewart go to jail for running Stephen Colbert's super PAC? |url=http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Vox-News/2012/0118/Will-Jon-Stewart-go-to-jail-for-running-Stephen-Colbert-s-super-PAC |newspaper=The Christian Science Monitor}}{{Cite web |last=McGlynn |first=Katla |date=January 18, 2012 |title=Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert Expose More Super PAC Loopholes Without 'Coordinating' |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/jon-stewart-stephen-colbert-expose-super-pac-loopholes_n_1212670.html |website=The Huffington Post}}

In 2024, a Federal Election Commission ruling eased the restrictions on super PACs. Super PACs were allowed to coordinate with campaigns for the purposes of canvassing, which was deemed not "public communications."{{Cite news |last=Goldmacher |first=Shane |date=June 10, 2024 |title=A Democrat, Siding With the G.O.P., Is Removing Limits on Political Cash at 'Breathtaking' Speed |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/10/us/politics/fec-deadlock-deregulation.html}}

By January 2010, at least 38 states and the federal government required disclosure for all or some independent expenditures or electioneering communications.{{Cite web |title=Unknown |url=http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1082&context=ylsspps_papers |url-access=registration |access-date=13 January 2016 |website=Yale Law School}} These disclosures were intended to deter potentially or seemingly corrupting donations.{{Cite journal |last=Briffault |first=Richard |author1-link=Richard Briffault |year=2010 |title=Campaign Finance Disclosure 2.0 |journal=Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy |volume=9 |issue=4 |pages=273–303 |doi=10.1089/elj.2010.9408}}{{Cite web |last=Krishnakumar |first=Anita S. |date=February 18, 2007 |title=Towards a Madisonian, interest-group-based, approach to lobbying regulation |url=http://www.law.ua.edu/pubs/lrarticles/Volume%2058/Issue%203/krishnakumar.pdf |website=University of Alabama School of Law |page=10}} Contributions to, and expenditures by, super PACs are tracked by the FEC{{Cite web |title=Campaign finance data |url=https://www.fec.gov/data/ |website=Federal Election Commission}} and by independent organizations such as OpenSecrets.{{Cite web |title=Super PACs |url=https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php |website=OpenSecrets.org}}

Yet despite disclosure rules, political action committees have found ways to get around them.

The 2020 election attracted record amounts of donations from dark money groups to political committees like super PACs. These groups are required to reveal their backers, but they can hide the true source of funding by reporting a non-disclosing nonprofit or shell company as the donor. By using this tactic, dark money groups can get around a 2020 court ruling that attempts to require nonprofits running political ads to reveal their donors.{{cite web |last1=Massoglia |first1=Anna |last2=Evers-Hillstrom |first2=Karl |date=17 March 2021 |title='Dark money' topped $1 billion in 2020, largely boosting Democrats |url=https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/03/one-billion-dark-money-2020-electioncycle/#:~:text=The%202020%20election%20saw%20more%20than%20%241%20billion,cycle.%20That%E2%80%99s%20according%20to%20an%20estimate%20from%20OpenSecrets. |access-date=4 November 2022 |website=Open Secrets}}

In one high-profile case, a donor to a super PAC kept his name hidden by using an LLC formed for the purpose of hiding the donor's name.{{Cite news |last=King |first=Colbert I. |date=13 January 2012 |title=How D.C. interests sidestep campaign finance limits |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-dc-interests-sidestep-campaign-finance-limits/2012/01/13/gIQAzc1BxP_story.html |access-date=13 January 2016 |newspaper=The Washington Post}} One super PAC, that originally listed a $250,000 donation from an LLC that no one could find, led to a subsequent filing where the previously "secret donors" were revealed.{{Cite news |last=Luo |first=Michael |date=7 February 2012 |title=The Caucus: A Secret Donor Revealed |url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/a-secret-donor-revealed/ |access-date=1 February 2020 |work=The New York Times}} However, campaign finance experts have argued that this tactic is already illegal, since it would constitute a contribution in the name of another.{{Cite web |date=2011-08-05 |title=The strange case of W. Spann, LLC |url=http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2011/08/05/the-strange-case-of-w-spann-llc/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170714034319/http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2011/08/05/the-strange-case-of-w-spann-llc/ |archive-date=July 14, 2017 |access-date=13 January 2016 |website=Center for Competitive Politics}}

A "pop-up" super PAC is one that is formed within 20 days before an election, so that its first finance disclosures will be filed after the election.{{Cite web |last=Balcerzak |first=Ashley |date=2018-11-02 |title=Pop-up PACs are spending big in Election 2018's final days — but they're hiding their bankrollers |url=http://publicintegrity.org/politics/pop-up-pacs-are-spending-big-in-election-2018s-final-days-but-theyre-hiding-their-bankrollers/ |access-date=2022-12-03 |website=Center for Public Integrity |language=en-US}}{{Cite news |last=Newhauser |first=Daniel |date=October 29, 2020 |title=Mysterious 'pop-up PACs' targeting races throughout country in final days of campaign |url=https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2020/10/29/mysterious-pop-up-pac-tries-to-attack-cunningham-in-last-days-of-senate-race/ |access-date=2022-12-03 |newspaper=Ohio Capital Journal |language=en-US}}{{Cite news |last1=Lee |first1=Michelle |last2=Narayanswamy |first2=Anu |date=November 6, 2018 |title=Mysterious anti-Ted Cruz super PAC spends $2.3 million in final stretch |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/live-updates/midterms/midterm-election-updates/mysterious-anti-ted-cruz-super-pac-spends-2-3-million-in-final-stretch/ |access-date=2022-12-03 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en}} In 2018 the Center for Public Integrity recorded 44 pop-up super PACs formed on October 18 or later, a year when the Federal Election Commission pre-general election reports covered activity through October 17.{{Cite web |title=2018 Reporting Dates: Pre- and Post-General Reports |url=https://transition.fec.gov/info/report_dates_2018.shtml#general |access-date=2022-12-03 |website=FEC |language=en}} In 2020 there were more than 50.

Pop-up super PACs often have local-sounding or issue-oriented names.{{Cite news |last=Markay |first=Lachlan |date=2022-09-13 |title=Establishment Republicans hide fingerprints with carefully timed primary spending |url=https://www.axios.com/2022/09/13/republican-super-pacs-primaries-ad-spending |access-date=2022-12-03 |work=Axios |language=en}} However they can be funded by much larger party-affiliated PACs.{{Cite press release |title=CLC Complaint Seeks to Address Bipartisan Usage of Deceptive "Pop-Up" Super PACs |date=July 15, 2021 |publisher=Campaign Legal Center |url=https://campaignlegal.org/update/clc-complaint-seeks-address-bipartisan-usage-deceptive-pop-super-pacs |language=en |last=Quinn |first=Brendan |access-date=2022-12-03}} In 2021 the Campaign Legal Center filed a complaint with the FEC, listing 23 pop-up Super PACs which had failed to disclose their affiliation to other PACs mostly affiliated with leaderships of the two major parties.

Super PACs may support particular candidacies. In the 2012 presidential election, super PACs played a major role, spending more than the candidates' election campaigns in the Republican primaries.{{Cite magazine |last=Noah |first=Timothy |date=29 March 2012 |title=Crankocracy In America. Who really benefitted from Citizens United? |url=http://www.tnr.com/article/trb/magazine/102114/crankocracy-friess-simmons-oligarchs-election-america |magazine=The New Republic}} As of early April 2012, Restore Our Future—a super PAC usually described as having been created to help Mitt Romney's presidential campaign—had spent $40 million. Winning Our Future (a pro–Newt Gingrich group) spent $16 million.{{Cite web |last=Farley |first=Robert |date=July 25, 2012 |title=Winning Our Future |url=http://www.factcheck.org/2012/01/winning-our-future/ |website=FactCheck.org}} Some super PACs are run or advised by a candidate's former staff or associates.{{Cite news |date=February 20, 2012 |title=Who's Financing the 'Super PACs' |url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/31/us/politics/super-pac-donors.html |work=The New York Times}}

In the 2012 election campaign, most of the money given to super PACs came from wealthy individuals, not corporations. According to data from OpenSecrets, the top 100 individual super PAC donors in 2011–2012 made up just 3.7% of contributors, but accounted for more than 80% of the total money raised,{{Cite web |last=Riley |first=Charles |date=March 26, 2012 |title=Can 46 rich dudes buy an election? |url=https://money.cnn.com/2012/03/26/news/economy/super-pac-donors/index.htm |website=CNN Money}} while less than 0.5% of the money given to "the most active super PACs" was donated by publicly traded corporations.{{Cite web |last1=Palmer |first1=Anna |last2=Phillip |first2=Abby |date=2012-08-03 |title=Corporations don't pony up for super PACs |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73804.html |website=Politico}}

As of February 2012, according to OpenSecrets, 313 groups organized as super PACs had received $98,650,993 and spent $46,191,479. This means early in the 2012 election cycle, PACs had already greatly exceeded total receipts of 2008. The leading super PAC on its own raised more money than the combined total spent by the top 9 PACS in the 2008 cycle.{{Cite web |title=Super PACs |url=http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?ql3 |access-date=2012-02-04 |website=OpenSecrets.org |publisher=OpenSecrets}}

Super PACs have been criticized for relying heavily on negative ads.{{Cite news |last=Mooney |first=Brian C. |date=February 2, 2012 |title=Super PACs fueling GOP attack ads |url=http://archive.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/02/02/damage_from_super_pac_ads_is_hurting_gop_presidential_candidates/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120609033911/http://articles.boston.com/2012-02-02/news/31018056_1_super-pacs-negative-ads-newt-gingrich |archive-date=2012-06-09 |work=The Boston Globe}}

The 2012 figures do not include funds raised by state level PACs.

In the 2016 presidential campaign, super PACs were described (by journalist Matea Gold) as "finding creative ways to work in concert" with the candidates they supported and work around the "narrowly drawn" legal rule that separated political campaigns from outside groups/super PACs. "Nearly every top presidential hopeful" had "a personalized super PAC" that raised "unlimited sums" and was "run by close associates or former aides".{{cite news |last1=Gold |first1=Matea |date=6 July 2015 |title=Politics It's bold, but legal: How campaigns and their super PAC backers work together |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/here-are-the-secret-ways-super-pacs-and-campaigns-can-work-together/2015/07/06/bda78210-1539-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html |access-date=29 October 2022 |agency=Washington Post}} Not only did the FEC regulations allow campaigns to "publicly signal their needs to independent groups", political operatives on both sides "can talk to one another directly, as long as they do not discuss candidate strategy." Candidates are even allowed by the FEC "to appear at super PAC fundraisers, as long as they do not solicit more than $5,000".

Representative David E. Price (D–NC) complained "The rules of affiliation are just about as porous as they can be, and it amounts to a joke that there's no coordination between these individual super PACs and the candidates." As of mid-2015, despite receiving 29 complaints about coordination between campaigns and super PACs, "FEC has yet to open an investigation".

File:X Æ A-Xii, Elon Musk and Donald Trump in the Oval Office - P20250207DT-0103 (54320797642).jpg with Donald Trump in February 2025. Trump relied on Musk's America PAC during his 2024 presidential campaign.]]

According to Open Secrets, in the 2019–2020 cycle (as of October 29, 2022) 2,415 groups organized as super PACs; they had reported total receipts of a little over $2.5 billion and total independent expenditures of a little under $1.3 billion.{{cite web |title=Super PACs |url=https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/super-pacs/2020 |access-date=29 October 2022 |website=Open Secrets}}

In the 2024 election cycle, there were 2,458 super PACs that raised $4,290,768,955 and spent $2,727,234,077.{{Cite web |date=6 November 2024 |title=Open Secrets 2024 Election Outside Spending |url=https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/super_pacs |access-date=7 Nov 2024 |website=Open Secrets}} Because super PACs were able to coordinate with campaigns on canvassing for the first time, Donald Trump's campaign relied on Elon Musk's America PAC, a super PAC, to lead his get-out-the-vote efforts in swing states.{{Cite news |last1=Schleifer |first1=Theodor |last2=Craig |first2=Susanne |date=November 6, 2024 |title=Trump's Victory Is a Major Win for Elon Musk and Big-Money Politics |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/06/us/elections/trump-musk-america-pac.html |access-date=November 8, 2024 |work=New York Times}}

• Political action committee
• Hybrid PAC

{{reflist}}

Category:Campaign finance in the United States

Category:Political terminology of the United States

{{Lobbying in the United States}}