Inside the FEC with Chair Shana Broussard

In a landmark episode for the Facts About PACs community, hosts Micaela Isler, Adam Belmar, and David Schild sit down with Federal Election Commission Chair Shana Broussard. 

Chair Broussard is leading the FEC through its longest quorum crisis in the agency's 50-year history — now past 295 days without the four commissioners needed to issue advisory opinions, move enforcement matters forward, or finalize regulations. She joins the show to explain what that means in practical terms for PAC professionals, what the agency can still do for the regulated community, and why she's operating as if quorum could be restored tomorrow.

The conversation also tackles some of the biggest issues facing the PAC community right now — from Chair Broussard's passionate case for indexing PAC contribution limits to inflation after 50 years stuck at $5,000, to her candid assessment of National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC, which she calls the most consequential case before the commission since Citizens United.

Don't miss this rare opportunity to hear directly from the nation's top campaign finance regulator at a pivotal moment for money in politics.

Transcript

Shana Broussard (00:00):
I think that this is the most crucial case that is before the commission since we had Citizens United.
Micaela Isler (00:12):
Welcome back to the facts about PACS podcast. I'm Micaela Isler, NABPAC's President and CEO, and I'm joined today by Adam Belmar and David Schild for a conversation with Federal Election Commission chair Shana Broussard. Chair Broussard became chair in January 2025, and now she's leading the commission at a time when it doesn't have the four commissioners needed for a quorum. That means the FEC can't issue advisory opinions, can't move forward on enforcement cases and can't issue regulations, but Chair Broussard is still focused on serving the regulated community and she has been active in her outreach efforts, including at NAB's recent legislative summit to keep the regulated community and the public informed.
David Schild (00:56):
Micaela, it's an election year and on the number one podcast for political and campaign professionals, we've got the number one federal official governing money in politics. This is going to be a great show.
Adam Belmar (01:06):
Yeah, this is a big get. I mean, there's no two ways about it. When you have the chair of the FEC joining the number one PAC podcast in America, you've done something right and your listeners are putting their ears on. The facts about PACS podcast is produced, especially for members of the National Association of Business Political Action Committees. In every episode, we recap this week's NAPACtivities, share actionable intelligence and best practices all while connecting the PAC community.
Micaela Isler (01:33):
Thanks so much, Adam. Yes, we are very excited about this show today, but before we get to our wonderful guest, we do have just a few NAB Pack activities to share. As we have been saying, have a lot of incredible events coming up, particularly next week on February 24th, our very own Amy Adams is going to be sharing all of the results from our revised and revamped survey that we undertook in 2025, really sharing the better practices, a lot of the trends that we're seeing in our PACS from both corporations and associations, and really what the best in class PACS are doing to be successful. So really thrilled to be able to have that readout next week at our luncheon, but I just encourage everyone to go to NABPAC Connect and register for all of our upcoming events through the first half of the year.
Adam Belmar (02:19):
David, this is like the citrus crop report. It is under such incredible security. People are trying to get at those answers. They want to get a first look, but they're not going to. Amy Adams got under lock and key. You're going to have to show up to learn.
Micaela Isler (02:32):
Well without further ado, joining us now is Federal Election Commission chair Shauna Brouchard Chair. Brouchard made history in 2020 when she became the first African-American to serve as FEC Commissioner. She previously served as chair in 2021 and she's now serving her second term as chair, which began in July, 2025 before becoming a commissioner chair. Broussard spent over 15 years at the FEC, including serving as counsel for Commissioner Steven T. Walter and as an attorney in the enforcement division. She's known for her work building bipartisan consensus, and she's recognized as a thought leader on federal campaign finance law Chair. Broussard, welcome to the Facts about pacs.
Shana Broussard (03:14):
Thank you very much for having me. I want to say it's good to see all of you again since I saw you not too long ago in October.
Micaela Isler (03:21):
Well, that was one of the highlights of our summit that we had back in the fall, so we really appreciated all of your time and just great discussion and kind of as a follow-up to that, you're leading the commission during a period when it lacks that four commissioners needed for a quorum. I think what's on everyone's mind is how are you approaching this role differently than you might've imagined when you first joined the commission?
Shana Broussard (03:43):
Yeah. This is a way different time than when I first joined the commission as a commissioner in 2021 when I first joined the commission and became the chair of Quorum had just been restored. So I'm using that experience of being thrown into the mix of things and catching up from a lack of quorum to be proactive. This time around, people have heard this. Oftentimes when I became the chair in 2021, there was a significant enforcement backlog of 452 cases, and in the course of that year with the concerted effort with everyone, we were able to reduce that backlog by 60%. Now, this current lack of quorum fortunately does not have the same numbers that we're looking at, but it's the fourth time in the 50 year history of this agency, and unfortunately, it's been the longest one because as of today, we're looking at 295 days, but I'm proud to say that my staff and I are operating as if a quorum could be restored tomorrow. We are actively going through every single matter. We are registering our votes. We're doing our best to make sure that we can have these things resolved as soon as possible, but I am spending a lot more time supporting the operations of the agency at large and educating the public about how the lack of quorum will affect the federal campaign process, particularly in this midterm time.
Adam Belmar (04:56):
So help people who are listening who think about the FEC perhaps solely from a compliance perspective. It's a regulator, it's a partner, it is the arbiter of whether you're doing it right and getting it straight. What does all of this mean in terms of practical implications for the commission and the professionals who are navigating compliance out there?
Shana Broussard (05:16):
It's a question that I love and the reason I love this question is because the commission is still receiving processing and publishing campaign finance data, and I still always use the opportunity to say, heads up everybody. You know that there is a March quarterly report that's coming up soon. I know you've got time, but I think it's a responsibility of mine to make sure that we are aware that the commission is still collecting this information. You still have an information division that is still available to answer questions, and every filer, political committees and filers are assigned a RAD analyst, so they're still available to help you through this process. The office of general Counsel, the enforcement division is still working on the complaints, the reviewing the complaints. They are sending it out to respondents for their response. They're still drafting reports. The only thing that's not happening is they're not being voted on at the very top level, but the agency is still working at full capacity. And one of the things, and we may talk about this, we're not able to do those aos that people do rely on for a very important thing. So while those top level things that people know from an outward perspective are not being done the hard work of the 260 plus people in this building, they're still getting everything done.
David Schild (06:30):
Shauna, this is such an important point because if you're not familiar with the commission, and you might say they're paralyzed by a lack of a quorum. In fact, the day-to-day business of collecting the information about where money and politics is being spent, where it's being collected, all of the things that separate segregated funds have to report the law is still in effect. Just because the referees on their side, tying their shoes maybe for a couple of months doesn't mean that the rules of the game have changed and all those compliance requirements still have to be met by our listeners.
Shana Broussard (07:00):
Exactly. There's still that full responsibility. It's important to note that the time period for an enforcement matter is the statute of limitations is five years, so I always want to caution people that you may think, and I like the analogy of the referees are tying their shoes. Look, that means the referees are still at the game, so we're still at the game. We might be tying our shoes, but pretty soon we're going to be called in. The match is going to start again, so please everybody, I want to say to you, please continue to stay on top of everything that you already have been doing, but remember that in the sense of maybe you might not get a response for the AO that you're seeking. You may not get a response for the enforcement matters that you're doing, but that day-to-day work and those individuals that you need, they are still there and they're ready to help you.
Micaela Isler (07:47):
I think too though, we should point out that at least maybe there is help on the way, at least two potential commissioners have been nominated. I know they've got a long process to get through the Senate confirmation, but do you have any sense on timing on that? Are you, I'm sure, hopeful that that'll be done sooner rather than later?
Shana Broussard (08:03):
Micaela, you are reading my mind here. If it were up to me, it would happen tomorrow, but it is not having gone through the process. There is obviously so much paperwork that has to be done getting through the rules committee actually having a hearing for that. I can't give a fair estimate on how long that would take, but we remain hopeful and excited that two great individuals have been nominated and I would be grateful and glad to work with them and I'm happy that the administration has made that effort.
Adam Belmar (08:31):
Chair Broussard, while you're in the background without a quorum doing the important work and keeping your team focused, you've also added things to your list of priorities and that has included outreach to the regulated community in also helping generally with education, speaking on news programs. I've seen you involved in many interviews, different places. Can you talk about why it's so important and why you have decided to make that such an important part of your push in 26?
Shana Broussard (09:02):
Outreach is extremely important because it serves in a twofold. One, it continues to educate the public about campaign finance and second, it's more important I think for even me to be able to reach out and talk to the regulated community to learn about the things that you need that changes that could or should be done in the federal campaign finance laws that can make this more effective for all of us, make it more effective for the agency to serve you, but make it more effective for you to do the work you do.
David Schild (09:30):
Chairman brossard, we're only 256 days away from the midterm elections. Can you talk about what happens at the commission in an election year that might be different because of course the business of regulating campaign finances 24 7 365, we know that, but how as we approach midterm congressional elections, the attitude, does the mood, do the activities change at the commission?
Shana Broussard (09:53):
I think the commission overall is a well-oiled machine on how things work, so I can't necessarily say that there's anything different that we could do, except I do believe that this is a time where you see a greater volume of work that's coming before the commission. You will see, of course, we've got the filers that are coming up. We're going to have pre-primary reports. We're going to have pre general reports, so in the sense that you're going to have more reporting and more availability for individuals to see how money is being raised and spent, that becomes something of greater necessity for the FEC during this time. I would note that this is also generally a time as we get closer to elections when the agency would have even more advisory opinion requests. I can't tell you who are they're requesting right now because they're just advisory opinion requests, but what I can say that we have a healthy number of advisory opinion requests that believe it's, I can at least tell you there's like 13 or 14.
(10:48):
You'll see an uptick of that as we get closer to an election because this is when the novel issues come up. That's not clearly written out in this brown book that I'm looking at on my desk, but that's the opportunity that we have before us as we come closer to an election and there's going to be more people having more questions. So the information division is going to be busier. You're also going to have the red analysts even busier than they are before, but we've been through it before and we're ready to get back to it again.
David Schild (11:17):
I'm so glad you mentioned advisory opinions because for so many of our listeners PAC directors, they rely on these advisory opinions or AOS for guidance on novel situations. So in a situation like this where we don't have a quorum and AOS can't be formally issued, what's your advice to proceed in an environment of uncertainty?
Shana Broussard (11:36):
Right. We do not have a quorum, which means we need four, not the full six, but four to be able to answer any of your advisory opinion requests. It's really important that people recognize that without this time of being able to answer your advisory opinions, we still have a wealth of information that is available on our websites. We have campaign guides, you have your analysts, you have the information division. What I do say during that time period is take note of the information that we have available. What I personally tell individuals is that if you are using something in the campaign guide, make sure you take note of that, but remember, I am not going to promise you that it's going to stop for any kind of enforcement action happening to you, but I do want to say that I think there's a lot of information available that you could help you in the meantime, but advisory opinions are crucial exactly for crucial for some of the practitioners.
(12:31):
For NAB Ppac, one of the things that we routinely see with your organization is advisory opinions on affiliation and affiliation is important because that's going to decide the contribution limits that you receive, and it's a pretty fact specific matter that we deal with that requires that we go through the information that you provide regarding your corporate status and relationships with the others, and it's a factual determination that can't happen unless the commission provides that information to you. So that is why it's crucial to have a quorum so that we can get back to giving your constituents the assistance that they need.
Micaela Isler (13:08):
Chair Brossard, the commission has long had the authority to make legislative recommendations to Congress and you have, but one of your priorities is recommending that Congress index contribution limits, which as you know is one of our top two legislative priorities. It's just very important as we look at the role of Super pacs and so much money in our system and really the role of traditional PACS being that regulated accountable form of giving. Can you explain why that matters and what it would mean for PACS and donors?
Shana Broussard (13:39):
The dollar amounts for individual contributions are indexed every two years for inflation, but other critical dollar amounts that are in feca of the Federal Election Campaign Act, we speak in acronyms in the federal government, include limits for contributions for PACS and SSFs. They're stale. I said this to your audience before, and I say it to anybody that will let me, and I am a broken record when it comes to that. If the contribution limits go up every election cycle, two or $300, you're stuck at $5,000 and you've been stuck at $5,000 for 50 years. Anybody can agree that that is stale. But this is going to sound funny and it's probably not going to sound very intellectual, but the price of a hamburger at McDonald's has gone up every single year. I don't eat at McDonald's, don't tell them, but the price there has gone up every single year and it's adjusted for inflation.
(14:34):
Why? When we're dealing with hard money, and this is the money that is subject to contribution limits, you cannot have contributions from specific type of entities and individuals. This is the money that I think personally for me, this is the type of money that I want to see in the campaign process. You are stuck at 5,000, but a super PAC can raise unlimited amount of funds. There's an inequity in that, and that is why I have been a proponent of this from the very start that I became a commissioner. I said it to your NAB PAC audience. I'm saying it to you audience now. I think it should be adjusted. I think it comes down to Congress to decide what the new number should be, but I do think that being stuck at $5,000 for the last 50 years is unfair and ridiculous.
Adam Belmar (15:20):
Shauna, as you take a look at the broader plate of issues that are confronting the FEC, are there other areas that you think would benefit the regulated community? If we got some legislative changes, what else would you like to see Congress take up?
Shana Broussard (15:38):
I'm an individual that is not afraid to speak with candor, so I hope that if you like it, then keep listening. If you don't like it, don't hang up on this one. They'll get you at the next episode. But here's something that's, and you don't use the word sexy in campaign finance, but this is how I'd like to funnily analogize it. Why are we still dealing in paper filing? This is just good practice. There are so many reports that your constituents that deal with that have to be filed by paper, and that's inefficient. It's inefficient for your constituents. It's inefficient for the FEC as well. This is a bipartisan agreement. It's a simple change, and I routinely say that this is one that just with a couple strikes of the pin could be for the benefit of your public as well as mine. And so that is a change that I do propose. It's not considered the sexiest one, but I consider it to be highly effective and could be cost saving all around for all of us. So with that contribution index change, also turning these things from paper filing into electronic filing to make things easier. That's just two quick little things that I think could happen that could make it a benefit for all of us.
David Schild (16:44):
Chairman, as you look ahead, what are the things that you want the PACT community to understand about the F'S role and mission? I think there are folks like those of us on this show who have been working with the agency for many decades in some cases, and we understand that you want to be a partner, right? That you're not the enemy. You're there to keep us compliant and keep everybody within those rules and regs and honestly facilitate participation in the political process. Newer people may be intimidated or they don't understand, and especially now when there's some inactivity to this lack of a quorum, but you're great about communicating the vision of the commission. What does our audience need to understand long-term structural issues? What do we need to know about where you're headed?
Shana Broussard (17:23):
What I want people to understand is that this is not an agency that is designed as a Got you. In any way. This is an agency that is designed to facilitate transparency in the campaign finance process. Transparency is the benefit of everyone to help from the disillusion that people have when it comes to money and politics. So what I want them to recognize is that while there is an enforcement capacity in this agency and there is a defense in court for certain things that the agency has undertaken, it is never the intention or never my intention, that we go against your First Amendment rights to be able to conduct speech in the way that you believe is appropriate. Transparency first and transparency is not designed to eliminate your speech. I am merely making sure that the individual viewer understands who is behind the speech that they're doing.
(18:17):
So I want to think of this agency as intended to be a facilitator, a helper, not as intended to be a detriment to anyone that chooses to engage in the campaign process, and that is why I have really appreciated the opportunity to speak to your audience. We are dealing with PACS that are dealing with hard money, and again, this is not a competition or a combat physical compact between the SSFs and the Super pacs, but I do think it's important to recognize that the money that comes in the heart of the money that you're dealing with is hard funds that promote the transparency that comes to the mission of the agency.
Adam Belmar (18:54):
Chair. Broussard, I love your comments and defense of the First Amendment. The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in December of last year in the National Republican Senatorial Committee versus the Federal Election Commission, a major challenge to federal limits on campaign expenditures coordinated between political parties and candidates. You want to share your thoughts about why this case is important and how you hope to see the court rule here?
Shana Broussard (19:20):
I think that this is the most crucial case that is before the commission since we had Citizen United, and I think that this will have, I pause not because I don't want to talk about it, but I pause because the fact is that this case could come down at any minute, and what it makes me think is my responsibility as the chair of this agency is how is this agency ready to implement and act upon that? And that takes me back to the thing of talking about we don't have a quorum, but let's say we had one. What that means is that we have to be ready to respond and act quickly with potentially changing reporting requirements. If the court should strike down that statute and say that it is unconstitutional, we have to prepare how to modify reporting requirements. We have to be prepared for a big segment of cases that we normally had seen in the instance of coordination.
(20:19):
We've got to redefine what coordination is because obviously there is this allowance that will be happening between the parties and the candidates. I think it also has the potential of bringing more money into the campaign process because, and this may be a plus for some, this may be a negative depending on who you work for, but there is less of reliance on Super pacs receiving funds when you can give it straight to the party and that could on who your client may be or your interest may be a detriment for you. It could in turn be a positive because it might bring greater numbers of hard money into the system as opposed to dark money as it's labeled into the system. So my thoughts are is I'm not feeling very strong that the court is going to uphold this statute. I don't feel sad or upset about it.
(21:14):
My opportunity and response is to act on what we have to do, and if the court strikes this statute, then we will be prepared to act in a way that makes sure that the reporting is there because disclosure has always been important, and that we will make sure that any disclaimer rules that need to be updated have to be approved by a commission, full commission, not Shauna, but there's going to be a lot of work that has to be acted upon. I stand in a position where I accept what the court may do, and then it's time for me to act and figure out what's the best way to make sure that the mission of the agency is there.
Micaela Isler (21:50):
Well, chair Brossard, that's very refreshing, and I first just want to thank you for your service, especially in this unprecedented time as a strong leader does. I really appreciate your positive outlook and trying to just do what you can in the situation you're in. So thank you for your dedication and service, and also just thank you so much for sharing your perspective on a number of topics with us today and for your continued service to the commission. It was a pleasure having you on with us. The facts about Pax Podcast,
Shana Broussard (22:19):
Thank you very much for having me. It was great talking to all of you, and I look forward to talking to you again.
Micaela Isler (22:24):
Awesome. And thanks to everyone downloading and sharing the facts about Pax Podcast. Subscribe and meet us right back here next week.

This transcript was exported on Feb 19, 2026 - view latest version here.


Transcript S7E6 FEC Chair Shana Broussard 2.19 (Completed  02/19/26)
Transcript by Rev.com
Page 1 of 2