Bill Overview
Title: No PAC Act
Description: This bill bars a candidate for Senator, Representative, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner from accepting an election contribution from any political committee other than an authorized committee of the candidate. Such a candidate may not establish a leadership Political Action Committee (PAC).
Sponsors: Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or supporting political campaigns for federal positions
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill targets candidates for federal electoral positions: Senator, Representative, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner.
- Senators and Representatives are elected in all 50 states, impacting national electoral processes.
- Delegates represent territories (e.g., Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands) and the District of Columbia in Congress, which are not states but have representation.
- Resident Commissioner is a non-voting member of Congress representing Puerto Rico, impacting Puerto Rican political candidates.
- The law changes who can fund these candidates' campaigns by banning political committee contributions except from authorized committees.
- Leadership PACs are typically used by politicians to support others, hence their prohibition could impact their influence and networking.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects those directly involved in political campaigns, such as candidates, campaign staff, volunteers, and politically active citizens who contribute to or work with PACs.
- People not directly involved in politics or election campaigns may experience minimal or indirect effects.
- The policy budget constraints suggest that its direct influence is limited to a specific subset of the population, possibly those most involved with or lobbying through PACs.
- Given the policy's target population and financial limits, it is essential to interview a diverse group of people, considering those who might indirectly benefit or be negatively impacted.
- Some individuals might see an improvement in their perception of politics due to perceived cleaner funding, while others might feel constrained in their networking or influence abilities.
Simulated Interviews
Campaign Manager (New York City, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could initially strain our funding capabilities.
- We need to rely more on grassroots donations, which could strengthen our community relations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this affects me much personally.
- Might feel better about donating in the future, knowing that funds are coming from individuals more.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Political Consultant (Roswell, NM)
Age: 52 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could limit the influence and reach of my consultancy.
- Finding alternative funding paths is critical for maintaining influence.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy doesn't seem relevant to me.
- Might be nice to know my vote counts without large PACs swaying things.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Campaign Volunteer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Campaign might need to change strategy with this policy.
- It would make grassroots efforts more critical.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired (Bismarck, ND)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy could change how campaign donations are structured.
- It's an adjustment period for many campaigns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Political Science Student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Interesting to see if this limits corruption.
- Could lead to more study opportunities on its long-term effects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Lobbyist (Austin, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could significantly impact my approach to lobbying.
- New limitations on funding sources are challenging.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Business Owner (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If it leads to more transparent systems, it might be better in the long run.
- Concern about the immediate effects on favorite candidates.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Journalist (Portland, OR)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It will be interesting to see how campaigns adjust strategies without PACs.
- This might lead to more engaging stories on campaign finance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $4000000)
Year 2: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $4000000)
Year 3: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $4000000)
Year 5: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $4000000)
Year 10: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $4000000)
Year 100: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $4000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill's impact on campaign financing strategies could alter electoral outcomes and political competition.
- Enforcement mechanisms and compliance monitoring will be crucial to the bill's effectiveness.
- Potential legal challenges could arise based on First Amendment rights and campaign financing jurisprudence.