Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Eliminates Super PACs, which are political groups that can raise unlimited money for candidates.
The problem
Super PACs can raise and spend unlimited money in elections, which critics say gives wealthy donors too much political influence compared to regular voters.
The proposal
The bill would eliminate Super PACs as legal entities, preventing organizations from raising unlimited funds specifically to support or oppose political candidates.
The impact
Political campaigns, wealthy donors, political parties, and candidates would be affected by new restrictions on how money flows into elections.
Super PACs currently allow rich individuals and corporations to donate unlimited money to influence elections. Eliminating them could give ordinary voters more equal say in politics. This addresses concerns that wealthy people have outsized political power.
Some voters believe Super PACs create corruption or unfair advantages. Removing them could make people feel elections are more fair and honest. Public confidence in the political system might improve.
Super PACs enable record-breaking campaign spending levels. Abolishing them might lower overall spending on elections. This could reduce the total money needed to run for office.
Without Super PACs, candidates would rely more on personal fundraising and grassroots support rather than wealthy outside groups. This could help lesser-known candidates compete against well-funded opponents.
Courts have ruled that spending money on political speech is protected by the First Amendment. Banning Super PACs might violate free speech rights. This could face legal challenges and be struck down by courts.
If Super PACs are banned, political spending might shift to other groups with fewer disclosure requirements. Dark money groups could become more powerful instead. The result might be less transparency, not more.
Super PACs often help non-establishment candidates compete against powerful incumbents. Removing them might make it harder for new political candidates to challenge sitting politicians. Sitting politicians might have more power to protect their seats.
Super PACs have existed since 2010 and are deeply embedded in campaign finance. Abolishing them would require major legal changes and enforcement. Campaigns would need to restructure how they raise and spend money.
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
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
No donor data found for current cycle
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.