Chapter 36 Exercises

Conceptual Exercises

Exercise 36.1: The Regulatory Timeline Create a detailed timeline of US campaign finance regulation and case law from FECA (1971) through the present, including: - FECA (1971, 1974 amendments) - Buckley v. Valeo (1976) - The "soft money" growth period (1980s–1990s) - BCRA (2002) - Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC (2007) - Citizens United (2010) - SpeechNow.org v. FEC (2010) - McCutcheon v. FEC (2014)

For each entry: (a) identify the specific rule change produced, (b) identify who gained and who lost from the change, and (c) assess the net effect on political transparency.

Exercise 36.2: Entity Classification For each of the following political money vehicles, classify it by entity type (candidate committee, traditional PAC, Super PAC, 501c4, party committee) and identify: contribution limits (to it, from it), disclosure requirements, and permissible activities:

  1. "Texans for Garza" — a committee that takes contributions from individuals and runs ads supporting Garza
  2. "America First Action" — raises money from corporations and individuals, runs ads independently
  3. "Citizens for Responsible Energy Policy" — a social welfare nonprofit that runs "issue ads"
  4. "National Democratic Senatorial Committee" — the Senate Democratic caucus fundraising arm
  5. "Oil Industry PAC" — a committee organized by a major petroleum company

Exercise 36.3: The Dark Money Chain A billionaire wants to contribute $5 million to help elect a US Senate candidate without having their name appear in publicly accessible FEC filings. Using the legal entities and structures described in this chapter, map out at least two different pathways through which this could be accomplished. For each pathway, identify: which entities are used, what is disclosed at each step, and what ultimately appears in the public disclosure record.

Analytical Exercises

Exercise 36.4: FEC Data Navigation Using OpenSecrets (opensecrets.org) or the FEC's data portal (fec.gov/data), find a competitive Senate race from the most recent election cycle. Answer the following questions using only publicly available data: - What were the total receipts for each major candidate's committee? - What percentage of itemized contributions came from out-of-state donors? - Which three industries provided the most PAC money to each candidate? - How much did Super PACs spend supporting or opposing each candidate? - Are there any 501(c)(4) "issue advocacy" organizations active in the race that you can identify (hint: look for FCC broadcast filings, not just FEC filings)?

Exercise 36.5: Donor Overlap Analysis Using FEC bulk data or OpenSecrets, identify a donor who has given to at least three different political committees in the most recent election cycle. Create a mini donor network centered on this individual showing: which candidates and committees they've given to, what industry sector they're in, and what ideological pattern (if any) their giving reflects. What does this individual's giving portfolio suggest about their political goals?

Exercise 36.6: Small-Dollar vs. Large-Dollar Candidate Comparison Choose two candidates in the same race from the most recent election cycle where one raised a significantly higher proportion from small-dollar donors than the other. Compare: - Their total fundraising - Their itemized donor composition (industry, geography, donor size distribution) - Their policy positions (are they more aligned with movement activist bases or with donor-class preferences?) - Their ultimate electoral outcome

Write a 400-word analysis of what the finance profile suggests about each candidate's political coalition and accountability relationships.

Applied Research Exercise

Exercise 36.7: ODA-Style Race Analysis Select a competitive US Senate or House race from the most recent election cycle. Build a simplified version of ODA's campaign finance analysis covering:

  1. Candidate committee profiles: Total raised, unitemized percentage, top industries, geographic origin of donations, cash on hand at key filing deadlines

  2. Outside spending profile: Super PAC spending for and against each candidate, party committee spending, any dark money activity you can identify

  3. Donor network sketch: The three most important donors or donor groups for each candidate, and what their giving suggests about the candidate's political commitments

  4. The campaign finance narrative: Based on your data, write a 300-word narrative analysis that could appear in a political journalism piece. What does the money story tell us about this race that the candidates' public statements don't?

Reflection Questions

  1. The FEC's disclosure system was designed to provide accountability for political money. But the same data is commercially available and used for microtargeting. Should the FEC data be free to use for any purpose, or should there be restrictions on commercial use of donor information?

  2. Candidates regularly claim their fundraising from small donors demonstrates grassroots support, while large-donor candidates claim their financial backing from established interests demonstrates credibility and electability. What does the research suggest about which fundraising model better predicts electoral success and post-election governance responsiveness?

  3. Adaeze Nwosu at ODA argues that following "the data about the money" is as important as following the money itself. Based on this chapter, what do you think she means by that distinction? Give two specific examples of cases where understanding the data architecture would change your analytical conclusions about a campaign's fundraising.