The Presidential Election Campaign Fund and Tax Checkoff


Book Description

Those who have participated have done so because of the obvious advantages in easier access to funds and, in a larger sense, a general acceptance of the public funding system in the political community and the media. [...] CRS-7 Evaluating the Merits of the System After nearly three decades, presidential election public funding is by no means a universally supported program, as reflected in declining taxpayer checkoffs, attempts in the 102nd and 104th Congresses to end the system, and decisions by major candidates to forgo public funding in the 2000 and 2004 elections. [...] In the past two years, concerns about the efficacy of the presidential public finance system have led a number of observers who generally support the system to offer critiques of its operation and suggestions for remedies. [...] Dean and Senator Kerry - was perhaps the clearest signal yet that problems in the system's operation had seriously eroded the appeal, and hence the value, of the presidential public funding system. [...] In addition, under BCRA's prohibition of national parties' raising and spending soft money, a candidate who has gained acceptance as the party's presumptive nominee in the early spring and who has spent the maximum allowed under the limits will not be able to count on the party to continue activity on his or her behalf until the nominating convention.




Public Financing of Presidential Campaigns


Book Description

The presidential public campaign financing program (the Presidential Election Campaign Fund [PECF]) is funded through "checkoff" designations on individual income tax returns. Choosing to participate (or not) in the checkoff does not affect one's tax liability or refund. Candidates who choose to participate in the program may receive taxpayer-funded matches of privately raised funds during primary campaigns, and grants during the general-election contest. Public funds also subsidize nominating conventions. The public financing system has remained largely unchanged since the 1970s. However, there is general agreement that, if the program is to be maintained, updates are necessary to provide greater financial resources and higher spending limits to participants. Some contend that the program should be curtailed or eliminated.