Bill Overview
Title: Ban Corporate PACs Act
Description: This bill prohibits for-profit corporations from establishing or operating a separate segregated political fund (commonly known as a political action committee or PAC). Existing funds must terminate not later than one year after the date of enactment of this bill.
Sponsors: Sen. Kelly, Mark [D-AZ]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by changes in political contributions due to corporate PAC ban
Estimated Size: 300000000
- Corporate PACs in the U.S. have contributed significantly to political campaigns. A ban would most directly impact corporations that rely on these PACs for political influence.
- The U.S. Federal Election Commission reports a substantial portion of PAC contributions come from corporate PACs, indicating this sector’s major role in U.S. political financing.
- Since 2016, corporate PACs have contributed billions to federal candidates, which means this legislative change affects those financial streams.
- Corporations seeking to influence U.S. legislation and political outcomes will need to seek alternative pathways.
- The ban indirectly affects employees of corporations who participate in PACs and rely on these political contributions for legislative outcomes favorable to their industries.
Reasoning
- This policy primarily affects individuals who are directly involved in or benefit from corporate PAC contributions, such as corporate executives, political consultants, and certain employees in industries heavily reliant on political lobbying.
- However, the broader impact is political and cultural, possibly altering the influence landscape in significant ways beyond direct economic benefits, affecting employees less directly.
- A wide range of the population might not feel immediate economic impacts but could experience changes in political representation or corporate influence dynamics.
Simulated Interviews
Corporate Executive (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will harm our company's ability to influence legislation that supports our industry.
- It limits tools available for corporate advocacy, potentially affecting our bottom line.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 7 |
Political Consultant (Austin, TX)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This ban challenges my career as it directly impacts my consulting area.
- I'll need to diversify my skills and client base.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Factory Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure about this policy as I don't directly interact with PACs.
- If my company's performance is affected, it might impact job security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think reducing corporate political influence is positive for democracy.
- This policy won't affect me directly, but I support it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about how much power corporations have in politics, so I support this policy.
- Having less influence from big money might result in fairer policies for average citizens.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Operations Manager (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy won't impact my day-to-day, but I worry if regulations supporting our sector might change.
- However, the legislative landscape is always evolving.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
College Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy will help curb undue corporate influence.
- It's more aligned with democratic principles I support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
HR Specialist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The ban may affect how our corporation lobbies for employee benefits.
- It's crucial to understand alternative ways to advocate our needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Retired Government Worker (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This ban is a necessary step towards reducing corruption.
- Still skeptical about enforcement and alternative routes corporations might take.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
PR Manager (Denver, CO)
Age: 53 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial for our company to adapt to this new political environment.
- We might need to explore alternative advocacy methods.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $15000000)
Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 10: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $2000000)
Year 100: $100000 (Low: $50000, High: $200000)
Key Considerations
- Corporations will need alternative routes to maintain political influence, potentially leading to shifts in political advocacy and lobbying strategies.
- The enforcement of the ban requires clear guidelines and strong oversight to avoid circumvention.
- Employees involved in corporate PAC activities might face job role changes or reductions.