Government affairs

With the Democratic National Convention and Republican National Convention both coming up in late July, the number of presidential candidates from both parties has significantly thinned down and front runners are beginning to solidify their leads.

Despite the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ensuring eligible citizens could vote without prejudice, the reach and breadth of the act is still being interpreted and litigated nearly 50 years later.

After presidential candidate Donald Trump’s big win in New York’s Republican primaries, the Cruz and Kasich campaigns have decided to coordinate together in an attempt to throw off Trump.

Previously, the Republican National Convention’s Rule 40 was thought to mean that candidates must pass the eight state threshold to be eligible for the Republican nomination.

The two Democratic presidential candidates have both outraised their Republican opponents significantly.

Many groups are still building their PAC infrastructures and sustainable donor bases.

Candidates increasingly are relying on more advocacy organizations to invest in their campaigns for success.

While the presidential race has been well underway for nearly a year now, there’s still much more to come that will help determine both parties’ nominees and will influence the general election afterward. 

The postal community spends millions of dollars trying to get their preferred candidates elected.

It’s no surprise that many members of Congress are eager to get their hands on a leadership position. But these positions have a price and require significant fundraising commitments from their party.

While presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush might be running with different parties, they both share one similar element: They lead in Super PAC donations.

Democrats appear likely to win back the Senate majority in 2016 after losing it in 2014.

The 2016 presidential election: Republican candidate profiles (source: National Journal)

The 2016 presidential election: Democratic candidate profiles (source: National Journal)

Running for Congress is expensive, and the House candidates who won in 2012 raised more than four times the amount of funds compared with those who ran in 1986.

Campaign finance laws can be confusing—and all the terms floating around only makes it even more complicated.

The most important part of winning a presidential nomination: receiving the majority of delegates available before the Democratic and Republican national conventions take place.

The Democratic and Republican presidential nomination processes may seem similar, but both have different rules created by state parties and national committees. Perhaps the biggest difference lies in the treatment and use of superdelegates.

The Center for Responsive Politics studied the use of Super PACs and found that while both political parties are increasing their reliance on Super PACs, Republicans are likelier to rely on a more diverse range of Super PACs than Democrats are.

NALC’s primary focus during election season has always been at the federal level, since federal elections affect letter carriers directly. But letter carriers across the country engage in politics at the state and local levels, too.

The biggest change in party affiliation in recent years has been the growing share of Americans who decline to affiliate with either party.

In 2012, winning Senate candidates spent an average of $10.3 million–a 62 percent increase since 1986, adjusted for inflation.

The campaign committees for the House and Senate dominate the list of political action committees (PACs) with the most money to spend, but there’s a big difference between the two.

Citizens United allowed unlimited election spending by individuals and corporations. However, other landmark campaign finance cases have come along since then.

Advocacy groups are all able to help influence elections and shape legislative outcomes with the help of their members. Yet there are sharp distinctions between organizations involved in advocacy and political action committees.

In 2012, Barack Obama spent $1.123 billion to run for president. The 2016 presidential elections are shaping up to require at least the same amount of money, if not more.