Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002: Summary and Comparison with Previous Law
Released: 2004-01-09T00:00:00

Summary:
The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) was enacted on March 27, 2002 as P.L. 107-155 . It passed the House on February 14, 2002, as H.R. 2356 (Shays-Meehan), bya 240-189 vote. Its companion measure, on which it was largely based, had initially been passed bythe Senate in 2001 as S. 27 (McCain-Feingold). On March 20, 2002, however, theSenate approved the House-passed H.R. 2356 by a 60-40 vote, thus avoiding aconference to reconcile differences between S. 27 and H.R. 2356 . A seriesof technical amendments to the bill was passed later that day by the House, in the form of H.Con.Res. 361 , which directed the Clerk of the House to make specified correctionsin the enrolled H.R. 2356 . The Senate approved the concurrent resolution on March22, thus clearing the measure for the President.
The two primary features of P.L. 107-155 are restrictions on party soft money and issue advocacy. First, the new Act generally bans the raising of soft money by national parties and federalcandidates or officials and restricts soft money spending by state parties on what the Act defines as"federal election activities." The Act does, however, allow for some use of soft money under certainconditions for specified federal election activities by state and local parties.
Second, the Act regulates issue advocacy by creating a new term in federal election law, "electioneering communication"-- political advertisements that "refer" to a clearly identified federalcandidate and are broadcast within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. Generally,the Act prohibits unions and certain corporations from spending treasury funds for such"electioneering communications." For those individuals and groups permitted to finance suchcommunications, it requires disclosure of disbursements of over $10,000 and the identity of donorsof $1,000 or more.
The Act generally took effect on November 6, 2002, the day after the 2002 general elections. Certain provisions, however, had different effective dates, either to allow a transition period or, asin the case of increased contribution limits, to make the new rules coincide with the calendar year.
On December 10, 2003, in McConnell v. FEC (No. 02-1674), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of key provisions of BCRA. A 5-to-4 majority of the Court upheld mostportions of the law, including the key provisions relating to political party soft money andelectioneering communications. The Court, however, invalidated two provisions of the law: theprohibition of contributions by minors age 17 and under and the provision requiring political partiesto choose between coordinated and independent expenditures during the post-nomination,pre-election campaign period.

subsections: section_title: Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-155): Summary and Comparison with Previous Law*