The Threat of Super PACs to Democracy

Many Americans vividly remember exactly where they were when they first heard that President Joe Biden was dropping out of the presidential race—a decision that may drastically change the result of the election. Although his decision to drop out of the race did align with polling data showing low voter enthusiasm for him, one of the key factors that influenced his decision often goes ignored: super Political Action Committees (super PACs). The Pass the Torch super PAC and the Future Forward super PAC, among several others, signaled through advertisements that they wouldn’t continue to campaign for Biden after his debate performance, which motivated Biden to leave the race.

Super PACs are independent political action committees that raise unlimited amounts of money from organizations and individuals. Soon after the Supreme Court lifted limits on election spending by outside groups in the Citizens United decision, super PACs were legalized in 2010 and have had a key role in electioneering since. Although super PACs are supposed to campaign independently and are not officially allowed to coordinate with candidates, super PACs can use funds they raise to align themselves with specific candidates. Then, they can advocate for said candidate by running ads, organizing Get Out the Vote campaigns, registering voters, and hiring staff to canvass—anything other than directly donating to candidates. The unrestricted fundraising abilities of super PACs have made them very powerful. In the 2024 election cycle alone, super PACs have already spent over 750 million dollars. As elections become more and more expensive, candidates often align their policies with the views of a super PAC in order to gain their support. This has given the wealthy individuals and companies that fund super PACs outsized power over election results. While this is not considered lobbying, it can have a similar effect on lawmakers, who benefit from super PAC spending.

Biden was not the only target this election season. Super PACs have also exerted extraordinary influence over the Republican presidential primaries. The Make America Great Again super PAC, a major super PAC aligned with Trump, spent around 33 million dollars campaigning against other Republican presidential candidates. This tactic of outcompeting opponents allows super PACs to drown out the voices of individual party members and voters in favor of the candidate of their choice.

Beyond using their power to influence presidential primary elections, super PACs also unfairly impact the selection of candidates for congressional and local races. When a super PAC opposes a candidate in a local primary, the impact can be much more severe than in a presidential race. Candidates competing in congressional primaries or local elections do not have the same fundraising ability as those in national elections, and leading super PACs occasionally outspend candidates’ own campaigns. In 2024, outside spending was greater than candidate campaigns in 19 congressional races. 

A notable example of super PACs trying to influence congressional primaries is two Republican aligned super PACs, Conservatives for American Excellence and America Leads Action, spending over six million dollars during Republican primaries in deeply red congressional districts, opposing candidates aligned with the far right Freedom Caucus of the Republican congressional delegation. In 2023, members of the Freedom Caucus were the primary force in pushing to oust speaker Kevin McCarthy. These super PACs want to prevent candidates endorsed by the Freedom Caucus from being elected into Congress because they fear these candidates’ potential for opposing the majority of House Republicans, as they did in the push to oust the speaker.

Another concerning feature of super PACs is their ability to influence the opposite party to benefit the party they are aligned with. Super PACs on both ends of the political spectrum often spend money boosting candidates in the opposite party’s primary who they feel will be easier to beat in the main election. For example, Democrat aligned super PACs spent nearly 44 million dollars on Republican primaries during the 2022 congressional election season. Much of this was spent boosting far right candidates, whose extreme views may have made them easier for Democrats to beat during general elections. Through their actions, super PACs limit the possibility for growth within the opposite political party and magnify political polarization.

Our democracy should ensure that every person has an equal say in the decisions being made. By allowing super PACs to raise unlimited funds to campaign for their political views, power in the democratic process has shifted towards wealthy individuals and institutions who fund super PACs. In order to prevent the balance of power from shifting unfairly towards affluent individuals, our democracy should place limits on the amount that any one individual can donate to a super PAC, making the campaigning decisions of super PACs representative of a larger set of individuals.

Unless the Citizens United decision, which identified outside political spending as a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment, is overturned in a legal challenge, the most effective legislative solutions will be ones that prevent implicit coordination between super PACs and candidates they support. Administrative oversight of super PAC actions and super PAC spending should increase so that they adhere to proper guidelines and restrictions.