Participation and Campaign Finance: The Case for a Tax Credit

In this issue brief, we argue for the left and the right to unite behind at least one core goal of campaign finance reform—encouraging more people to participate in our political process by donating money to a candidate of their choice. The issue brief makes the case for a new federal tax credit of up to $200 to individuals who make a contribution to a candidate or party, which would encourage more people to participate in the political process and broaden the base of financial support for candidates.

Summary

Five years after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, our democracy is badly broken. Chief Justice John Roberts and his conservative colleagues have turned our Constitution’s promise of democracy of, by, and for the people on its head, striking down a host of federal and state laws designed to limits opportunities for corruption. Meanwhile, the national conversation over money in politics has grown stale, with Congress gridlocked and unable to accomplish anything. Now, more than ever, we need to find reforms that can bridge the divide over money in politics and help improve our democracy.

In this issue brief, we argue for a change in conversation, urging the left and the right to unite behind at least one core goal of campaign finance reform—encouraging more people to participate in our political process by donating money to a candidate of their choice. The issue brief makes the case for a new federal tax credit of up to $200 to individuals who make a contribution to a candidate or party, which would encourage more people to participate in the political process and broaden the base of financial support for candidates.

More from Voting Rights and Democracy

Voting Rights and Democracy
March 23, 2026

The Alito Wing of the Supreme Court Sure Sounds Sold on Trump’s Voter Fraud Lies

Slate
CAC Director of the Human Rights, Civil Rights, and Citizenship Program David H. Gans' article...
Voting Rights and Democracy
March 23, 2026

The Supreme Court’s Conspiracy-Brained Justices Are Ready to Limit Mail-In Voting

Balls and Strikes
Balls & Strikes summarized the arguments in Watson v. RNC, linking to CAC's brief. Read more at...
Voting Rights and Democracy
March 21, 2026

Amicus with Dahlia Lithwick: The Roberts Court’s Internal Reckoning

Slate
The Constitutional Accountability Center's brief in Watson v. RNC was discussed on Slate's Amicus podcast. Listen to the full...
Voting Rights and Democracy
March 23, 2026

CAC Release: The Conservative Attack on Voting By Mail Comes to the Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Watson v....
By: David H. Gans, Simon Chin
Voting Rights and Democracy
March 19, 2026

“Myths Around Election Day Deadlines: What the Civil War Teaches Us About Absentee Voting”

Election Law Blog
CAC Senior Research Associate Lucy Resar‘s research on the history of absentee voting was featured on Election Law Blog....
By: Lucy Resar
Voting Rights and Democracy
March 19, 2026

Myths Around Election Day Deadlines: What the Civil War Teaches Us About Absentee Voting

Over the past two decades, the Supreme Court has steadily eroded access to the ballot....
By: Lucy Resar