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
September 5, 2024

“Moore v. Harper, Evasion, and the Ordinary Bounds of Judicial Review”

Election Law Blog
David Gans, Brianne Gorod, and Anna Jessurun have posted this draft on SSRN (forthcoming, Boston College Law Review)....
By: Brianne J. Gorod, David H. Gans, Anna Jessurun, Rick Hasen
Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

In re: Georgia Senate Bill 202

In In re: Georgia Senate Bill 202, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit is considering whether the Materiality Provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits states from denying...
Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Nairne v. Landry

In Nairne v. Landry, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Voting Rights Act’s prohibition on vote dilution is a constitutional exercise of Congress’s Fifteenth Amendment enforcement power.
Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

United States v. Paxton

In United States v. Paxton, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Materiality Provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits states from denying the right...
Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen

In Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is considering whether requiring voters to include their birthplace on voter registration forms violates the Materiality Provision of the...
Voting Rights and Democracy
May 24, 2024

Voting Rights Experts Find Old Ideas in New Racial Gerrymandering Standard

Courthouse News Service
WASHINGTON (CN) — Seven years ago, Justice Samuel Alito lamented his colleagues' refusal to create...
By: David H. Gans, Kelsey Reichmann