PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 25, 2022
Stopping Corrupt Actors from Making Political Action Committees Act or the SCAM PAC Act
This bill generally prohibits a political committee from disbursing funds to an entity that is owned or controlled by an individual, or the immediate family member of an individual, who has authority to carry out specified activities for the committee (e.g., soliciting funds) or is employed by the committee to provide it with professional services. This prohibition does not apply to (1) a political committee that certifies that a majority of the funds disbursed by the committee were for expenses other than administrative costs, fundraising costs, and employee salaries; or (2) an authorized committee of a candidate, a committee of a political party, or a separate segregated fund of a corporation or labor organization.
Further, the bill prohibits a political committee from employing these individuals or allowing them to volunteer on its behalf if the related entity accepted funds from a political committee.
People & committees
Rep. Malinowski, Tom [D-NJ-7] · D–NJ
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 3, 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.6494 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.6494 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.6494 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.6494 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.