PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 21, 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Senate Election Spending Limits Title II: Reduction in Special Interest Influence Title III: Increase in Voter Participation Campaign Finance Reform Act of 1997 - Title I: Senate Election Spending Limits - Amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) to establish general election and primary personal and aggregate expenditure and contribution limits for eligible Senate candidates. Imposes a fee upon a candidate who exceeds expenditure limits. Sets forth related Federal Election Commission judicial review and reporting provisions. Title II: Reduction in Special Interest Influence - Amends FECA with respect to "soft money" to: (1) prohibit a national committee of a political party (including specified related entities) from soliciting or receiving contributions or making expenditures not subject to such Act; (2) require a State, district, or local committee of a political party to make Federal election year expenditures (with exceptions) from funds subject to such Act; (3) prohibit a national, State, district, or local committee of a political party from soliciting or donating funds to a tax-exempt organization; and (4) prohibit an incumbent or candidate for Federal office from soliciting or receiving funds not subject to such Act, or from soliciting or receiving funds for a non-Federal election in excess of certain limits or from prohibited sources (with exceptions for State or local candidates in compliance with State law). Sets forth specified reporting requirements. (Sec. 202) Redefines "independent expenditure." (Sec. 203) Prohibits contributions by foreign nationals. (Sec. 204) Amends the Communications Act of 1934 with respect to broadcast media election rates. Title III: Increase in Voter Participation - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to provide a maximum $100 tax credit ($200 in the case of a joint return) for contributions to congressional candidates. (Sec. 302) Directs the Commission to conduct a study of Federal election voter participation. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Dorgan, Byron L. [D-ND] · D–ND
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S149-151, S473-474)
Introduced in Senate
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 21, 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 S.95 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 S.95 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 S.95 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 S.95 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.