PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 31, 2007
Presidential Funding Act of 2007 - Amends Internal Revenue Code provisions relating to public financing of presidential election campaigns to: (1) quadruple (1:1 to 4:1) the matching rate for contributions to primary election candidates; (2) lower from $250 to $200 the limit on individual campaign contributions; (3) increase the presidential primary qualifying threshold from $5,000 to $25,000 in 20 states; (4) require presidential candidates to participate in the primary payment system to be eligible for general election payments; (5) move the starting date for payments to primary candidates from January 1 of a presidential election year to six months before the earliest state primary election; (6) allow additional payments and increased expenditure limits for candidates who face opponents who do not participate in public financing and who raise more than 20% of applicable spending limits; (7) designate the last Friday before the first Monday in September as the date for payments to eligible presidential candidates; and (8) increase from $3 to $10 the presidential campaign tax return check-off amount.
Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to: (1) increase expenditure limits for presidential primary campaigns and eliminate state primary spending limits; (2) limit political party general election campaign expenditures to $25 million, with an additional $25 million allowance after the party's candidate is nominated; (3) prohibit political parties from spending unregulated funds (soft money) on their national conventions; and (4) require presidential campaign committees to disclose information about bundled contributions (series of contributions aggregating more than $10,000).
People & committees
Rep. Meehan, Martin T. [D-MA-5] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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.776 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.776 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.776 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.776 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.