PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Personnel and Police.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1993
Common Sense Campaign Reform Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow a tax credit of up to $100 ($200 for a joint return) for qualified congressional campaign contributions. Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to reduce the ceiling (from $5,000 to $2,500) on multicandidate political committee (PAC) contributions to candidates for Federal office. Increases the ceiling (from $1,000 to $2,000) on contributions to such candidates by persons other than PACs. Prohibits a candidate for Federal office from establishing, maintaining, financing, or controlling a political committee (leadership committee) other than the principal campaign committee. Prohibits contributions between PACs. Requires the authorized committee of a candidate to include in the report of contributions to such committee certain identifying information of contributors of more than $25. Requires a separate segregated fund established by a national bank, corporation, or labor organization that is a PAC to include in its name the name of the establishing entity. Requires the candidate to sign any required reports.
People & committees
Rep. Slattery, Jim [D-KS-2] · D–KS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Personnel and Police.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 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.355 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.355 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.355 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.355 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.