Sponsors (4)
The bill aims to reduce corruption and dark‑money influence to make government and elections fairer and more trustworthy, but it risks legal challenges, added compliance costs, and unintended burdens on lawful lobbying and collaboration.
Middle-class and low-income voters: reduced influence of wealthy donors and dark money in elections, making electoral outcomes more responsive to average voters.
Taxpayers and the general public: strengthened federal institutions through policies that reduce corruption and dark‑money influence, which could increase public trust in democracy.
Taxpayers and federal employees: tighter rules on revolving‑door conflicts and insider trading by officials, reducing self‑dealing and improving fairness in policymaking.
Taxpayers and middle‑class voters: broad restrictions on political spending could be challenged as limits on political expression, prompting litigation and legal uncertainty.
Federal employees and small‑business owners: anticorruption provisions that are overly broad or poorly targeted could inadvertently burden lawful lobbying and public‑private collaboration needed for policymaking.
Taxpayers and small‑business owners: stronger anticorruption rules could impose additional compliance and administrative costs on officials, candidates, and political organizations.
Based on analysis of 1 section of legislative text.
Expresses congressional findings that corruption, dark money, revolving-door conflicts, and pay-to-play practices threaten democracy and states a purpose to support anti-corruption measures without creating new legal authorities.
Official title: Denouncing corruption in all its forms.
Introduced May 29, 2026 by Jason Crow · Last progress May 29, 2026
Declares congressional findings and expresses concern about corruption, dark money, revolving-door conflicts of interest, use of public office for private gain (including insider trading, foreign business deals, gifts, crypto sales), pay-to-play quid pro quo risks tied to campaign donations, and pardons linked to donors. It frames these issues as threats to democratic institutions and public confidence and states a purpose to support anti-corruption measures, but it does not itself create new legal authorities, specify policy changes, or set funding or deadlines.