Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Bill is filed in its originating chamber and assigned a number.
Filed in the Senate.
Next: In Committee
Members of the committee(s) the bill was referred to
Requires disclosure of funding sources for political advertisements and communications.
The problem
Political spending is often hidden behind anonymous groups. Voters don't know who is actually paying for ads that try to influence their votes.
The proposal
The bill would require organizations running political ads to reveal who donates money to them, making funding sources public and transparent.
The impact
Political advertisers, donors, campaigns, and voters are affected. Advertisers must disclose donors. Voters get more information. Donors lose anonymity.
Transparency helps voters understand who is trying to influence them and why. This allows people to make better decisions about candidates and issues. Informed voters strengthen democracy.
Secret funding can hide special interests trying to influence elections. Disclosure makes it harder for powerful groups to quietly control politics. This helps level the playing field.
Transparency in political spending increases confidence that the system is fair. People are more likely to trust elections when they see who funds campaigns. This strengthens democracy.
Courts have supported requiring disclosure while protecting free speech rights. Knowing who pays for speech can be required without banning the speech itself.
Some people worry that requiring disclosure could discourage people from spending money on political speech. Donors might fear harassment or retaliation if their names are public. This could reduce participation in politics.
Government agencies would need resources to track and enforce disclosure rules. Campaigns and groups would spend money complying with new requirements. These costs might divert money from other purposes.
Wealthy donors might find ways to hide money through multiple organizations or shell companies. Foreign actors could disguise funding sources. Enforcement would be difficult and ongoing.
Local groups and grassroots organizations might struggle with compliance rules. Disclosure requirements could burden small nonprofits and community groups more than large, well-staffed organizations.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
SRES 929
A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding equity stakes held by the Federal Government in private companies.
HR 5235
Skills-Based Federal Contracting Act of 2025
HR 2332
SHARE Act of 2026
HR 9191
National Fossil Act of 2026
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.