Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee: Implications for parties, corporate polictical dialogue, and campaign finance reform

• Published in: American business law journal Vol. 40; no. 1; p. 83
• Main Author: Richards, Eric L
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, Ohio Academy of Legal Studies in Business 01.10.2002
• Subjects: Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 2002-US; Campaign contributions; Candidates; Child support; Congressional elections; Constitutional law; Expenditures; Political advertising; Political finance; Political parties; Presidential elections; Studies; Supreme Court decisions; United States > US
• ISSN: 0002-7766; 1744-1714

The US Supreme Court, in Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee (Colorado II) (2001), upheld the constitutionality of legislation limiting the amount of money political parties can spend in cooperation with candidates for federal office. This long-awaited decision provides a key piece in the puzzle for campaign finance reformers seeking ways to insulate electoral politics from the monetary influence of corporations and other big donors. The Colorado II Court examined campaign finance measures passed in the wake of the Watergate Scandal when Congress enacted the 1974 amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act. In their decision, 7 justices held that the government could not impose dollar limits on political parties' expenditures in connection with candidate elections when they were made independently, without coordination with any candidate. Colorado II and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act likely will permit corporations and others seeking political favors to easily mask their independent expenditures as issue advocacy that falls outside of regulatory limits.