IFS Research

Since the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. FEC, which freed corporations and labor unions to finance independent expenditures in support of federal candidates, the ...

Critics of taxpayer-financed political campaigns frequently argue that such programs increase government spending and reduce available public dollars for spending on other priorities. Advocates often respond that taxpayer funding ...

Super PACs seem to have burst upon the electoral scene in 2010, following the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission.1 ...

In a pair of recent decisions, Davis v. FEC and Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, the Supreme Court has struck down on ...

Over the past 15 years advocates of campaign finance reform, frustrated by the structure and design of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), have attempted to offload ...

Advocates for strict campaign finance laws and low contribution limits often suggest that such limits will do much to improve government. For this reason, proposals and groups urging ...

There is a long-standing scholarly literature on the electoral effects of campaign spending; nevertheless, the academic research offers only limited guidance for policy makers interested ...

In January 2010, the United States Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, struck down a federal ban on independent expenditures in political ...

On June 27, 2011, The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett that a portion of Arizona’s tax-financed ...

Advocates of taxpayer-funded political campaigns, often called “clean elections” or “public financing” by their proponents, claim that these systems provide the ability for an increased number of diverse, non-traditional ...