PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 392.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 5, 2006
527 Reform Act of 2005 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) to include in the definition of political committee any applicable 527 organization. (Thus subjects such organizations to the requirements of the Act. A 527 organization, as defined by section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code, is an organization, not controlled by or involving a particular candidate for office, whose function is to influence or attempt to influence the selection, nomination, election, or appointment of any individual to any federal, state, or local public office or office in a political organization, or the election of presidential or vice-presidential electors, whether or not such individual or electors are selected, nominated, elected, or appointed.) Requires the organization to give notice to the Secretary of the Treasury under section 527 that it is to be treated as an organization described in section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code.
Excepts from the definition of 527 organization under FECA a committee, club, association, or other group of persons (organization) which: (1) is a 527 organization under the Internal Revenue Code; (2) is organized, operated, and makes disbursements exclusively for paying certain tax-deductible business expenses or expenses of a certain kind of political newsletter fund; (3) consists solely of candidates for or individuals holding state or local office, but only if the organization refers only to one or more non-federal candidates or applicable state or local issues in all of its voter drive activities, without reference to any federal candidate; or (4) whose election or nomination activities relate exclusively to elections where no candidate for federal office appears on the ballot, or to influencing the selection, nomination, election, or appointment of one or more candidates to non-federal offices or individuals to non-elected offices, or influencing one or more applicable state or local issues.
Denies the treatment of any such organization as meeting such exclusivity requirement if it makes disbursements aggregating more than $1,000 for: (1) a public communication that promotes, supports, attacks, or opposes a clearly identified candidate for federal office during the one year period ending on the date of the general election for the office sought by the candidate (or if a runoff election is held with respect to such general election, on the date of the runoff election); and (2) any voter drive activity during a calendar year, except a drive in only one state with no reference to federal office candidates.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 3) Sets forth rules for allocation and funding for certain expenses relating to federal and non-federal activities, including payments of 100% or 50% from a federal account in several specified circumstances. Limits individual donations to a political committee that is a separate segregated fund or nonconnected committee to an annual aggregate of $25,000 for its qualified non-federal account.
(Sec. 4) Repeals the limit on the amount of party expenditures on behalf of candidates in general elections. Raises the limits for House and Senate candidates facing wealthy opponents.
(Sec. 6) Prescribes special rules for actions brought for declaratory or injunctive relief to challenge the constitutionality of any provision of this Act. Requires such an action to be filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and to be heard by a three-judge panel. Makes any final decision by the panel reviewable only by the U.S. Supreme Court. Authorizes Members of Congress to: (1) bring an action challenging the constitutionality of this Act; and (2) intervene in any action in which the constitutionality of any provision of this Act is raised. Applies such special rules only to actions brought on or before December 31, 2008.
People & committees
Rep. Shays, Christopher [R-CT-4] · R–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 392.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 218 - 209 (Roll no. 88). (text: CR H1516-1518)
House roll call 88 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 218 - 209 (Roll no. 88).(text: CR H1516-1518)
House roll call 88 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H1528)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 513.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 513 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. The bill shall be considered in the House. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on House Administration now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. Measure will be considered read. (consideration: CR H1514-1516)
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 755. (consideration: CR H1514-1529; text of measure as reported in House: CR H1514-1516)
Rule H. Res. 755 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 755 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 513 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. The bill shall be considered in the House. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on House Administration now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. Measure will be considered read.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on House Administration, H. Rept. 109-181, Part II.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on House Administration, H. Rept. 109-181, Part II.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 113.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 109-181.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 109-181.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) Without Recommendation by the Yeas and Nays: 5 - 3.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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 6, 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.513 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.513 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.513 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.513 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.