Reclaiming Our Democracy Updates

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

Raising the Limits

Using Federal Election Commission data on federal candidate fundraising from individuals, parties, and political action committees, we found that BCRA’s doubling of contribution limits did not deliver the promised benefit of more competitive elections and may be, in part, responsible for several harmful emerging trends. Races did not become more competitive; in fact, incumbents continued to out-raise challengers and win re-election at high rates. The data show not only a continued electoral dominance of the largest fundraisers, but also an increase in the disparity between winners and losers—between candidates with access to wealthy donors and those without.

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

Look Who's Not Coming to Washington

Large contributions made by a small fraction of Americans unduly influence who runs for office and who wins elections in the United States. Without personal wealth or access to networks of wealthy contributors, many qualified and credible candidates are locked out of contention for federal office—often before voters have the opportunity to register their preferences or hear competing points of view. Our analysis of Federal Election Commission (FEC) campaign finance data for the 2004 election cycle reveals that money was as important to candidates in the most recent congressional elections as it has ever been. 

Report | Research for The Rest of Us | Democracy

Making Safe Seats Safer

Large campaign contributions allow wealthy donors to unduly influence who can run for office and who wins elections in Ohio. This analysis examines the role of campaign contributions in influencing the outcome of Ohio elections.

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

The Wealth Primary 2004

Building on our analyses of the 2002 congressional primary and general elections, we examined campaign finance data compiled by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for the 2004 congressional primaries. Predictably, we found that money continued to play a key role in determining election outcomes and that the majority of campaign contributions came from a small number of large donors (many of whom reside out-of-state).

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

Toward a Small Donor Democracy

Long before voters register their preferences on Election Day, the flow of political money determines which candidates are able to mount viable campaigns for federal office. Providing public incentives for small political contributions could help average Americans play a more meaningful role in influencing who has the resources to run effective campaigns and win public office.

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

The Role of Money in the 2002 Congressional Elections

This report provides a summary of the role of money in the 2002 congressional elections. While most analysts have focused on soft money in recent years, our findings indicate that hard money plays a more critical role in the political process.

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

Look Who's Not Coming to Washington 2002

Large contributions made by a small fraction of Americans unduly influence who can run for office and who wins elections in the United States. Without personal wealth or access to networks of wealthy contributors, many qualified and credible candidates are locked out of contention for federal office— often before voters have the opportunity to register their preferences.

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

The Wealth Primary 2002

Our analysis of Federal Election Commission (FEC) campaign finance data for the 2002 election cycle indicates that money played a key role in determining election outcomes and that the majority of campaign contributions came from a small number of large donors (many of whom reside out-of-state).

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

Contribution Limits And Competitiveness

For years, academics, political theorists, and campaign finance reformers have debated the causal relationship between campaign contribution limits and the outcome of elections. Some argue that limiting campaign contributions amounts to "incumbent protection;" others contend that limits make challengers more competitive. This study is the first of its kind to comprehensively examine the states with contribution limits and empirically measure changes in competitiveness. Based on an analysis of 30,000 elections in 45 states, this study found that campaign contribution limits slightly favor challengers by reducing the incumbent margin of victory.

Report | U.S. PIRG Education Fund | Democracy

The Lobbyist's Last Laugh

Despite giving almost a quarter of a million dollars to candidates, Political Action Committees (PACs) and parties in the last election cycle, K Street did not mount a campaign against the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill as it went to the floor of the Senate earlier this year. The reason lies in the fine print of the bill.

Pages

Priority Action

The overuse of antibiotics on factory farms is threatening the effectiveness of lifesaving antibiotics. Call on the Obama administration to put an end to the worst practices.

Support Us

Your donation supports U.S. PIRG’s work to stand up for consumers on the issues that matter, especially when powerful interests are blocking progress.

Consumer Alerts

Join our network and stay up to date on our campaigns, get important consumer updates and take action on critical issues.