Early access: 15,549 bills from the current Congress so far, more added daily. Data from Congress.gov, GovInfo and the House and Senate vote records, updated Oct 13, 2026.
Public Law TrackerPLTPublic Law Tracker
H.R. 10566IntroducedHouse · nowSenatePresidentLawIn committee
Sec. 3 · H.R. 10566

Findings

Read this section in the full bill →

This section appears in one version only, so there is nothing to compare yet.

Congress finds the following: (1) SuperPACs are a type of political committee that arose following the July 2010 Federal court decision in a case known as SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission, which was decided soon after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in January 2010 in a case known as Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. (2) Technically known as independent expenditure committees, SuperPACs have been permitted by these court decisions to raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, associations and individuals, then spend unlimited sums to overtly advocate for or against political candidates. Unlike traditional PACs, SuperPACs are prohibited from donating money directly to political candidates, and their spending must not be coordinated with that of the candidates they benefit. (3) According to OpenSecrets, as of March 2025, 2,502 entities organized as SuperPACs reported total expenditures of $2,688,997,939 in the 2023–2024 Federal election cycle. (4) Loopholes in existing SuperPAC disclosure laws have enabled SuperPACs to spend millions of dollars funding deceptive campaign advertisements without having to reveal to voters who is paying for the advertisements until after the election is over. (5) In order for voters to make an informed choice in the political marketplace, campaign advertisements by SuperPACs should not be allowed to deceive voters about the identity of who or what interest is trying to persuade them how to vote. (6) Disclosing who or what interest paid for a SuperPAC campaign advertisement will help voters be able to better evaluate the arguments to which they are being subjected during political campaigns and therefore make more informed voting decisions. (7) Over the last five years, voters in three States—voters statewide in Alaska and Arizona and local voters in San Francisco, California—approved ballot initiatives that enacted stronger campaign ad disclosure laws in order to empower and inform voters. (8) In 2024, Federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, rejected legal challenges to these State and local campaign ad disclosure laws and allowed them to stand. (9) Congress should build upon the successful innovations of State initiatives and take action to strengthen Federal law to empower and inform voters about SuperPACs.

Sec. 3: Findings · Public Law Tracker