The Federal Election Commission, which had long been stuck in deadlock due to an equal division between three Republicans and three Democrats, has recently seen a shift in power. A new bloc of three Republicans and one Democrat is now voting together to roll back limits on political fundraising and spending. Many reform groups are alarmed by the swift unraveling of longstanding regulations, while conservatives are pleased to see the loosening of restrictions. These changes mark some of the most notable revisions to campaign finance rules since the introduction of the McCain-Feingold Act two decades ago.
Commissioner Dara Lindenbaum, a Democrat, has emerged as a key swing vote, often aligning with the Republicans in crucial decisions. This unexpected turn has led to tensions within the Democratic bloc. Some of the recent rulings, including allowing super PACs and campaigns to coordinate door-to-door canvassing, permitting unlimited fundraising for state-level ballot measures, and allowing anonymous donations through trusts, have all been decided on 4-2 votes, with Ms. Lindenbaum playing a crucial role. This shift has been described as a monumental change in the commission’s approach to campaign finance regulation.
In a recent interview, Ms. Lindenbaum downplayed the significance of the decisions, emphasizing that she was simply following the law and formalizing what had been common practice. While initially surprising to many due to her progressive background, Ms. Lindenbaum’s experience as a lawyer representing politicians navigating campaign finance rules has informed her approach as a commissioner. Republicans have praised her practical approach to interpreting campaign finance laws, while others have expressed concern about the implications of the recent rulings.
The dynamics within the commission have changed significantly from years of gridlock to a trend towards deregulation. While Democrats had previously adopted a strategy of refusing to close stalled investigations to prompt legal action, Ms. Lindenbaum’s vote to close those cases marked a turning point. Despite a tense relationship with some fellow Democrats, Ms. Lindenbaum has found common ground with Republican commissioners, particularly on the need to simplify and update campaign finance rules.
Some of the key decisions that have drawn attention were sought by prominent Democratic attorney Marc Elias, known for his work in voting rights litigation. The surprising alliance between Ms. Lindenbaum and Mr. Elias, who advocated for loosening regulations on money in politics, underscores the divide between those who prioritize reducing money’s influence and those focused on electoral success. As Ms. Lindenbaum’s term extends until 2027, the implications of her decisions will continue to shape the landscape of campaign finance regulation, with both Democrats and Republicans acknowledging that further changes may be on the horizon.
Despite the disagreements and partisan divides within the commission, all members recognize the significant impact of the recent decisions on the campaign finance system. The shift towards deregulation and the increasing influence of money in politics present challenges for both reform advocates and those seeking to navigate the evolving rules. The legacy of Ms. Lindenbaum’s term, alongside the internal dynamics of the commission, highlights the complexities of regulating campaign finance and the ongoing debate over the balance between free speech and fair elections.
