John,

By now, you may have heard about Project 2025. And we want to highlight one part of Project 2025 that’s flown under the radar:

Project 2025 would drastically change the structure and processes of the Federal Election Commission to further weaken the agency—and it also urges Congress to give wealthy donors more power and influence in our elections.

Written by 31 former Trump administration officials, nominees and transition team members, Project 2025 is a policy framework for a potential second Trump presidency.

One chapter that is extremely dangerous was written by former FEC Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky, who, in 2017, was appointed by Donald Trump to serve on his “Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity” (which was disbanded after it was unable to turn up any evidence of widespread fraud in the 2016 election).

The chapter is all about loosening restrictions on lobbying activities and corporate contributions to political campaigns, ensuring that campaign finance law is *not* enforced and the FEC is weakened–handcuffing the governing body responsible for overseeing and enforcing federal campaign finance laws.

Here’s what Project 2025 calls for:

1. Raise the limits on what individuals can give directly to candidates

This would give big donors in politics even more power and influence. Specifically, it says, “Contribution limits should generally be much higher, as they hamstring candidates and parties while serving no practical anti-corruption purpose.”

In the 2024 election, individuals can donate $3,300 per election ($6,600 for the primary and general election combined) directly to candidates and an additional $371,700 to a party committee. Through vehicles like “joint fundraising committees” that allow candidates to give to multiple candidates or committees at one time, donors can give even more.

In the 2022 cycle, just 0.1% of people in the U.S. donated $2,900 or more to candidates (the limit in that election). So John, this proposal to make these limits “much higher” will only give big donors more power over the policymaking process and further drown out the voices of average Americans.

2. Appoint commissioners who won’t enforce the law

The FEC requires that no more than three of the six commissioners can be of the same political party.

Over the years, this structure has mostly given Republican commissioners the ability to block investigations or stop enforcement of our campaign finance laws, even when the nonpartisan attorneys or staff think it’s merited because 4 votes are needed to launch an investigation or take further action.

And, as CREW reported earlier this year,

“As of December 2023, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has received 59 allegations that Donald Trump or his committees violated the Federal Election Campaign Act. In 29 of those cases, nonpartisan staff in the FEC’s Office of General Counsel (OGC) recommended the FEC investigate Trump. Yet not once has a Republican FEC commissioner voted to approve any such investigation or enforcement of the law against Trump.”

As an agency already hobbled by partisan obstruction, appointing commissioners who would not enforce the law would lead to a further weakening of our campaign finance laws and less transparency about who’s trying to influence our elections.

3. Limiting campaign finance enforcement

Project 2025 also encourages the president to instruct the Department of Justice, which is responsible for criminal enforcement of campaign finance law, and the attorney general to defer to the FEC’s interpretation of campaign finance law and enforcement precedents, including in cases where the FEC is deadlocked. That would effectively empower anti-enforcement commissioners—who regularly vote as a bloc to impede enforcement —to dictate the DOJ’s approach to criminal enforcement.

This would likely mean fewer people would face consequences for breaking our campaign finance laws and more corruption would go unchecked.

John, the facts are clear: Project 2025 wants to make it easier for big money and corporations to influence their elections—and they want to make it harder for the government to hold lawbreakers accountable.

Thank you,

Adam Smith
Vice President for Democracy Initiatives
CREW