Election Law

Forums: Legal, Elections, Campaign Finance Reform, Campaign Debt
Email this Topic • Print this Page

If after the election, the campaign fund of a candidate for U.S. federal office (e.g., U.S. Senate) has a negative balance, is the candidate personally responsible for it? If not, what is the disadvantage to the candidate of stiffing the campaign fund's creditors? Stiffing the campaign fund's creditors causes their loans to the campaign to be come donations to the campaign. If the resulting donation amount is more than the law allows, what happens?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 1 • Views: 1,056 • Replies: 2

No top replies

@gollum,

This old article about the Hillary Clinton campaign financial debt might answer some of your questions:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90425733

1 Reply

@Butrflynet,

Butrflynet-
Thank you.

The answer appears to be that the candidate is not on the hook personally (unless he or she is the lender).

The campaign fund does not have a deadline to pay its creditors.

No mention is made of legal liability for large loans that become donations larger the legal limit.

In conclusion, I find it surprising that candidates spend a lot of effort trying to pay their campaign fund's liabilities, when they could just walk away from it.

0 Replies

Election Law

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know