Institute For Free Speech

Contribution Limits: Caps on First Amendment Activity
January 1, 2018  •  By IFS Staff  •    •  

Contribution limits are monetary restrictions on the amount an individual or group can donate to a political actor – usually a candidate, political party, or political action committee. The Supreme Court first allowed limits on contributions in Buckley v. Valeo. The Court’s ruling acknowledged that contribution limits were a restriction on First Amendment activity, but allowed them on the theory…

Testimony of CCP Chairman Bradley A. Smith to Illinois Reform Commission
February 24, 2009   •  By Brad Smith   •  , , ,

Reporting on the first public forum held by this Commission just last week, the Daily Herald led with the question, “Could public financing of political ...

Issue Analysis 5: Do Lower Contribution Limits Decrease Public Corruption?
January 1, 2009   •  By Laura Renz   •  ,

Supporters of campaign finance regulation regularly assert that contributions to political candidates need to be limited in order to reduce corruption by elected officials, and the lower the ...

The Perverse Effect of Campaign Contribution Limits: Making the Amount of Money that can be Offered Smaller Increases the Likelihood of Corruption in the Federal Legislature
April 1, 2008   •  By IFS staff   •  ,

A fundamental purpose of campaign finance reform is to reduce corruption. Other goals and affects attach themselves to campaign reform, of course, such as ...

Regulating Political Contributions by State Contractors: The First Amendment and State Pay-to-Play Legislation
February 1, 2008   •  By IFS staff   •  ,

In 2004, Governor Jim Rowland of Connecticut resigned in the midst of scandal. He was accused of accepting lavish gifts and political contributions from state government ...

Case Study No. 1: Philadelphia’s (Predictable) Unintended Consequences: The Failure of Contribution Limits in the 2007 Mayor’s Race

 Default Article
January 1, 2008   •  By IFS staff   •  ,

CCP study on the effect of contribution limits on Philadelphia's 2007 mayoral race.

“What if We’re to Blame?”

 Default Article
November 3, 2006   •  By IFS staff   •  ,

In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Robert J. Samuelson considers whether public opinion is to blame for the problems in ...

Politics and the Pulpit

 Default Article
September 13, 2006   •  By IFS staff   •  , ,

All too frequently, regulation is a scale that balances the arbitrary against the vague.  Decreasing one tips the scale towards the other.  According to ...

McCain-Feingold Electioneering Brownout Kicks in Today

 Default Article
September 8, 2006   •  By Brad Smith   •  , ,

The "electioneering communications" provisions of the McCain-Feingold law kick into place today.  This means no union or corporate money may be used to finance ...

Contribution Contradiction in North Carolina

 Default Article
August 7, 2006   •  By Steve Hoersting   •  ,

North Carolina Governor Mike Easley has been busy. On July 23, 2006, he signed into law H.B. 1845, which prohibits the personal use of ...

Campaign Finance Laws and Political Efficacy: Evidence from the States
August 1, 2006   •  By IFS staff   •  , ,

DO CAMPAIGN FINANCE REGULATIONS affect how citizens view their government? This question is both theoretically important and policy-relevant. A central argument for more restrictive campaign finance laws at ...

Load more

Get the Latest Updates

© 2025 Institute for Free Speech | 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW | Suite 801 | Washington, DC 20036 | 202-301-3300

The word mark Institute for Free Speech® and its logo of a stylized lantern with a flame are federally registered service marks and are owned by the Institute for Free Speech.