Federal Funding of Presidential Nominating Conventions: Overview and Policy Options

R. Sam Garrett
Specialist in American National Government

Shawn Reese
Analyst in Emergency Management and Homeland Security Policy

This report provides an overview and analysis of two recurring questions surrounding the federal government’s role in financing presidential nominating conventions. First, how much public funding supports presidential nominating conventions? Second, what options exist for changing that amount if Congress chooses to do so? Both issues have generated controversy in the past and continue to be the subject of debate. In the 112th Congress, H.R. 359, which passed the House January 26, 2011, and companion measure S. 194, propose to eliminate the presidential public financing program, including convention funding. In December 2011, the House passed H.R. 3463, another measure to eliminate the public financing program, including convention funding. Another measure, H.R. 414, would maintain the public financing system but eliminate convention financing. These measures do not appear to affect separate security funding discussed in this report.

There have been no major changes to the presidential public financing program or political funding for conventions since the early 1990s (and, some would argue, even the 1970s). The 110th Congress enacted one law (P.L. 110-161) in FY2008 that affected convention security funding with the appropriation of $100 million for the Democratic and Republican nominating conventions (each was allocated $50 million). This security funding was not provided to party convention committees but to the state and local law enforcement entities assisting in securing the convention sites. The House-passed version of the FY2012 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill (H.R. 2017) proposed $12 million for a National Special Security Event funding, and the Senate-passed version proposed $19 million.

As of this writing, the 2012 Democratic and Republican convention committees have each received one grant, financed with public funds, of approximately $17.7 million. Both conventions will also receive inflation payments—about $600,000 for each convention—in 2012. These funds will go toward political activities at the conventions rather than security.

A total of approximately $133.6 million in federal funds supported the 2008 Democratic and Republican conventions. Such funding was provided through separate federal programs that support public financing of presidential campaigns and convention security. Some Members of Congress and others have objected to federal convention funding and have argued that the events should be entirely self-supporting. Others, however, contend that public funding is necessary to avoid real or apparent corruption in this aspect of the presidential nominating process. If Congress decides to revisit convention financing, a variety of policy options discussed in this report might present alternatives to current funding arrangements.

Additional discussion of public financing of presidential campaigns appears in CRS Report RL34534, Public Financing of Presidential Campaigns: Overview and Analysis, by R. Sam Garrett and CRS Report R41604, Proposals to Eliminate Public Financing of Presidential Campaigns, by R. Sam Garrett. For additional information on National Special Security Events, which include presidential nominating conventions, see CRS Report RS22754, National Special Security Events, by Shawn Reese. This report will be updated in the event of additional legislative activity concerning convention financing.


Date of Report: December 8, 2011
Number of Pages: 17
Order Number: RL34630
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.