Policy Proposal: Banning PAC and Super PAC Influence in New York State Elections

I. Executive Summary

This proposal recommends that New York State enact comprehensive campaign finance reform to ban Political Action Committees (PACs) and Super PACs from contributing to, coordinating with, or independently spending on behalf of candidates in New York State elections. The objective is to reduce the disproportionate influence of wealthy donors and special interest groups, restore public trust in government institutions, level the electoral playing field for candidates, and enhance the integrity and fairness of New York’s democratic processes.

The proposed reform would prohibit:

• Direct contributions from PACs and Super PACs to state and local candidates;
• Independent expenditures by PACs and Super PACs intended to influence New York elections;
• Coordination—direct or indirect—between campaigns and any outside entity engaged in political spending;
• Use of “dark money” nonprofits as pass-through entities for PAC-related expenditures.
• This policy places New York at the forefront of national democracy reform by ensuring that political power rests with voters—not with wealthy donors or special interests.

II. Background & Problem Statement

New York elections have become increasingly dominated by outside spending from PACs and Super PACs. These entities can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money—often without full transparency—allowing a small number of corporations, industry groups, and ultra-wealthy individuals to exert disproportionate influence.

Key concerns include:

• Excessive financial influence: PACs and Super PACs distort electoral outcomes by amplifying the voices of large donors over everyday citizens.
• Erosion of public trust: The perception that elections can be “bought” has substantially weakened confidence in state government.
• Corporate and special-interest dominance: Industries with significant financial resources can shape public policy through targeted political spending.
• Negative campaigning and polarization: Super PACs produce much of the most polarizing, misleading, and attack-driven political messaging.
• Barriers to candidate diversity: Outside spending advantages well-funded incumbents and politically connected candidates, limiting competition and representation.
• Loopholes and coordination issues: Although coordination between campaigns and Super PACs is prohibited, enforcement is weak and loopholes are routinely exploited.

Without significant reform, the integrity and fairness of New York’s elections will continue to decline, further undermining democratic participation and public confidence.

III. Policy Goals

The proposed ban aims to achieve the following goals:

• Strengthen democratic integrity by reducing the influence of large financial actors in elections.
• Increase transparency and accountability in political spending.
• Promote candidate diversity and fairness by reducing financial barriers to entry.
• Reduce political polarization driven by high-spending attack ads and inflammatory political messaging.
• Enhance public trust in elections and state government institutions.
• Ensure policymaking prioritizes public needs over donor preferences.
• Improve voter engagement by fostering a political environment in which individuals feel their voices genuinely matter.

IV. Proposed Legislative and Regulatory Actions

Statutory Prohibitions: The Legislature should enact a new Article within New York’s Election Law establishing:

• Prohibition on PAC and Super PAC contributions: No PAC, Super PAC, corporate PAC, or hybrid PAC may contribute money, in-kind support, or any other resource to any candidate, candidate committee, or political party.
• Ban on independent expenditures by PACs and Super PACs: All independent expenditures intended to influence New York elections by PACs, Super PACs, or affiliated entities shall be prohibited.
• Restrictions on nonprofit pass-throughs (“dark money”): Nonprofits organized under IRS §501(c)(4), §501(c)(5), or §501(c)(6) may not engage in political expenditures if they receive funding from corporate PACs, Super PACs, or out-of-state independent expenditure committees.
• Strengthened anti-coordination rules: Any public communication, strategic discussion, vendor sharing, or indirect signal intended to support or oppose a candidate shall constitute prohibited coordination.
• Ban on foreign-influenced political spending: Reinforce and expand existing prohibitions to ensure foreign-affiliated corporations cannot circumvent restrictions through PACs or intermediaries.

V. Implementation Framework

A. Enforcement Authority

The New York State Board of Elections (NYSBOE) shall be assigned primary authority to administer, oversee, and enforce the ban, including:

• Investigating potential violations;
• Issuing subpoenas and requiring financial disclosures;
• Auditing political committees and suspected intermediaries;
• Collaborating with the Attorney General for civil or criminal enforcement actions.

B. Penalties

Violations shall include:

• Significant civil fines based on the amount improperly contributed or spent;
• Disqualification of candidates who knowingly engage in prohibited coordination;
• Criminal penalties for willful and fraudulent violations;
• Permanent prohibition on operating political committees in New York for repeat offenders.

C. Transition Period

A 6–12 month phase-in period is recommended to allow campaigns, donors, and organizations to restructure compliance practices.

VI. Anticipated Benefits

1. Increased Public Trust

Removing the appearance that elections are influenced by wealthy donors strengthens confidence in government institutions.

2. Fairer, More Competitive Elections

Candidates without wealthy donor networks—including women, young candidates, working-class New Yorkers, and people of color—would have a more equitable path to office.

3. More Issue-Focused Campaigns

Candidates would spend less time fundraising and more time engaging voters on policy solutions.

4. Reduced Polarization

Banning Super PACs would curtail the negative, sensationalized advertising that fuels division.

5. Stronger Policy Outcomes

Policymaking becomes more reflective of statewide needs rather than special-interest agendas.

6. Enhanced Transparency

Dark-money pathways are reduced, clarifying who is financially influencing elections.

7. Strengthened Election Integrity

Closing coordination loopholes eliminates a major avenue for manipulation and foreign or illegal influence.

VII. Fiscal and Administrative Impact

The policy is expected to yield a net positive fiscal and administrative impact:

• Reduced enforcement costs associated with complex reporting and monitoring of PAC-related activity;
• Lower campaign spending overall, which decreases investigative burdens;
• Minimal administrative costs associated with updating compliance rules, public guidance, and oversight procedures.

VIII. Stakeholder Impact Analysis

Positive Impacts:

• Voters: Greater confidence in elections and stronger representation.
• Candidates: More equitable campaign environment and reduced fundraising burdens.
• Community organizations: Renewed importance of grassroots engagement and civic participation.

Neutral or Manageable Impacts:

• Political parties: May need to adjust strategies but will benefit from clearer rules and greater public trust.

Negative Impacts (Intended):

• Corporate PACs and special interests: Reduced influence in shaping elections and policymaking.

IX. Conclusion

New York has long been a national leader in bold government reform. By banning PACs and Super PACs from influencing state elections, New York would take a historic step toward restoring democratic integrity, strengthening public trust, and ensuring that the voices of its citizens—not wealthy donors—determine our shared future.

This proposal charts a clear path forward: a cleaner, fairer, more accountable political system where the power belongs to the people of New York.

#PeopleOverPACs