Stop Super PAC-Candidate Coordination Act

Bill Number

H.R. 5238

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Government Operations and Politics

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-09-09: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.

Last Updated

2026-04-23T08:06:46Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The "Stop Super PAC-Candidate Coordination Act" (H.R. 5238) aims to close loopholes in federal campaign finance laws by treating certain coordinated spending by outside groups, like Super PACs (political action committees that can raise unlimited funds), as direct contributions to candidates. This would subject such spending to existing contribution limits and bans. It also strengthens prohibitions on federal candidates fundraising for these groups, promoting more transparent and limited campaign financing.

Key Provisions

• Treatment of Coordinated Expenditures as Contributions: Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) to define a "contribution" to include payments for "coordinated expenditures" made by non-candidate entities (e.g., Super PACs) in cooperation with a candidate, their committee, or agents. This applies unless the spending is entirely independent.
• Definition of Coordinated Expenditure: Includes payments for ads or communications made in consultation with a candidate, or those that republish or distribute the candidate's campaign materials (e.g., videos or graphics).
• Exceptions: Does not apply to genuine news stories, editorials, or candidate debates/forums, unless controlled by a political party or candidate.
• Coordination Standards:
• Coordination occurs if there's any understanding or communication about the spending, beyond just sharing policy views (a "safe harbor" protects discussions on legislative positions without touching campaign tactics like ads or strategy).
• No protection for "firewalls" (internal barriers to prevent information sharing within an organization).
• Special rules for "coordinated spenders" (e.g., groups formed by or closely tied to a candidate, including those managed by family members or using the candidate's former staff/consultants), treating their ads as inherently coordinated.
• Covered Communications: Focuses on public ads that promote a candidate, attack opponents, or mention them during key election periods (e.g., 120 days before a general election or 60 days before a primary). For congressional races, ads must target the relevant district or state.
• Penalties for Violations: Knowingly making prohibited coordinated payments incurs fines of 300% of the excess amount (if over limits) or the full amount (if banned entirely). Corporate officers can be personally liable if unpaid.
• Fundraising Ban Clarification: Prohibits federal candidates and officeholders from soliciting, directing, or transferring funds to Super PACs or similar groups that accept unlimited or unregulated donations (except state/local party committees).
• Implementation:
• Repeals current Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulations on coordination 90 days after enactment and requires new ones reflecting these changes.
• Applies to payments 120 days after enactment; fundraising ban starts for elections after January 1, 2026.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Expands Contribution Definition: Previously, coordinated spending by independent groups like Super PACs was not always treated as a direct contribution, allowing unlimited funds to flow indirectly. This bill explicitly includes such spending under FECA's contribution limits (e.g., $3,300 per individual per election as of 2023) and bans (e.g., from corporations or foreign nationals).
• Broadens Coordination Triggers: Replaces narrower FEC rules with stricter criteria, eliminating loopholes like firewalls or shared consultants. It codifies ties (e.g., candidate involvement in group formation or fundraising) as automatic coordination.
• Strengthens Fundraising Restrictions: Builds on existing bans by explicitly covering Super PACs and 527 organizations (tax-exempt political groups), closing gaps that allowed candidates to indirectly raise unlimited money.
• Regulatory Overhaul: Forces the FEC to scrap and rewrite coordination rules, shifting from agency interpretation to statutory mandates.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The FEC will face increased enforcement duties, including new rulemaking and investigations into coordination, potentially straining resources but clarifying ambiguous areas.
• On Citizens and Voters: Could reduce the influence of big-money donors by limiting how Super PACs support candidates, leading to more equitable elections and less negative or repetitive ads. However, it might limit free speech in political advocacy.
• On Candidates and Campaigns: Federal candidates may have fewer outside spending allies, forcing reliance on regulated contributions, which could level the playing field for challengers but complicate grassroots efforts.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though stricter rules might indirectly affect foreign-influenced spending by enhancing scrutiny of group funding sources.
• Broader Effects: May decrease overall election spending by Super PACs (which spent billions in recent cycles) and increase transparency through better reporting.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Federal Candidates and Officeholders: Directly restricted from coordinating with or fundraising for Super PACs, impacting their campaign strategies.
• Super PACs and Political Committees: Face new limits on spending and fundraising ties to candidates, potentially reducing their role and requiring operational changes (e.g., avoiding shared staff).
• Donors and Advocacy Groups: Individuals, corporations, and 527 organizations limited in how they can support candidates without triggering contribution rules.
• Federal Election Commission (FEC): Responsible for enforcement, regulation updates, and penalties, with increased workload.
• Voters and the Public: Benefit from potentially cleaner campaigns but may see shifts in political messaging and funding dynamics.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: Codifies and expands FECA enforcement, making violations civil (fines) rather than just administrative, with personal liability for executives. Could lead to more litigation over what counts as "coordination" or "independence."
• Constitutional Implications: May face First Amendment challenges, as past Supreme Court rulings (e.g., Citizens United v. FEC, 2010) protected independent expenditures as free speech. Critics might argue it chills political expression, while supporters see it as upholding anti-corruption rules under Buckley v. Valeo (1976).
• Political Implications: Bipartisan sponsorship (Democrats and Republicans) signals cross-aisle concern over unlimited money in politics, but passage could polarize debates on campaign finance reform. If enacted, it might reduce Super PAC dominance in close races, influencing election outcomes and party strategies without altering core contribution limits.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Ramirez, Delia C. [D-IL-3]

Cosponsors (8)

Rep. Mullin, Kevin [D-CA-15], Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12], Rep. McCollum, Betty [D-MN-4], Rep. Lee, Summer L. [D-PA-12], Rep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44], Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26], Rep. Foushee, Valerie P. [D-NC-4]

Recent Actions

• 2025-09-09: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
• 2025-09-09: Introduced in House
• 2025-09-09: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Stop Super PAC-Candidate Coordination Act — issued 2025-09-09 — PDF (15 pages)