Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 60.0

524US1

Unit: $U72

[09-06-00 17:28:15] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 524 U. S. 11 (1998)

15

Opinion of the Court

reports that include lists of donors giving in excess of $200
per year (often, these donors may be the group’s members),
contributions, expenditures, and any other disbursements
irrespective of their purposes.

§§ 432–434.

The Act’s use of the word “political committee” calls to
mind the term “political action committee,” or “PAC,” a term
that normally refers to organizations that corporations or
trade unions might establish for the purpose of making con-
tributions or expenditures that the Act would otherwise pro-
hibit. See §§ 431(4)(B), 441b. But, in fact, the Act’s term
“political committee” has a much broader scope. The Act
states that a “political committee” includes “any committee,
club, association or other group of persons which receives”
more than $1,000 in “contributions” or “which makes” more
than $1,000 in “expenditures” in any given year.
§ 431(4)(A)
(emphasis added).

This broad deﬁnition, however, is less universally encom-
passing than at ﬁrst it may seem, for later deﬁnitional
subsections limit its scope. The Act deﬁnes the key terms
“contribution” and “expenditure” as covering only those
contributions and expenditures that are made “for the
purpose of
inﬂuencing any election for Federal ofﬁce.”
§§ 431(8)(A)(i), (9)(A)(i). Moreover, the Act sets forth de-
tailed categories of disbursements,
loans, and assistance-
in-kind that do not count as a “contribution” or an “ex-
penditure,” even when made for election-related purposes.
§§ 431(8)(B), (9)(B).
In particular, assistance given to help a
candidate will not count toward the $1,000 “expenditure”
ceiling that qualiﬁes an organization as a “political commit-
tee” if it takes the form of a “communication” by an organiza-
tion “to its members”—as long as the organization at issue
is a “membership organization or corporation” and it is not
“organized primarily for the purpose of inﬂuencing the nomi-
§ 431(9)(B)(iii).
nation . . . or electio[n] of any individual.”
This case arises out of an effort by respondents, a group
of voters with views often opposed to those of AIPAC, to