PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 30, 2015
Empowering Mass Participation to Offset the Wealthy's Electoral Role Act or the EMPOWER Act
Amends the Internal Revenue Code and the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to revise the system of public financing for presidential primary and general elections occurring after January 1, 2016.
Increases the amount of matching funds for presidential primaries from a one-to-one match to a six-to-one match for contributions of $250 or less from individuals, with a limit on aggregate individual contributions of $1,000. Limits the total amount of payments to a presidential primary candidate to $300 million. Provides for an inflation adjustment to matching contributions beginning after 2015.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires presidential primary candidates who opt to participate in the public financing system to certify to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) that they have raised $25,000 (currently, $5,000) in each of 20 states, with individual contributions limited to $250. Requires such candidates to commit to accept public financing in both the primary and general elections.
Prohibits presidential primary candidates or their authorized committees from accepting contributions or bundled contributions (i.e., combining small contributions into one large contribution) from lobbyists or political action committees (PACs).
Eliminates expenditure limitations for presidential primary and general elections.
Changes the period for payment of matching funds to presidential primary candidates from January 1 of the election year to six months prior to the date of the earliest state primary election.
Revises financing provisions for general elections to: (1) limit individual contributions to participating candidates to $1,000; and (2) extend matching payments to general elections at a six-to-one rate for contributions of $250 or less, to a maximum amount of $300 million in total matching payments to a publicly-financed general election candidate.
Increases to $100 million the limit on coordinated spending by a national party and its presidential candidate in a general election campaign.
Establishes a uniform date for the release of payments to eligible general election candidates.
People & committees
Rep. Price, David E. [D-NC-4] · D–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2143 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2143 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2143 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2143 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.