Hard money is a historical shorthand for funds raised and spent under federal contribution limits and source rules for regulated federal-election activity. Soft money referred especially to party funds raised outside those federal limits for activities described as party building. Federal law now bars national party committees from raising or spending nonfederal funds and regulates certain state-party activity connected to federal elections. The older label does not turn all modern outside spending into party soft money. A current analysis should identify the actor, account, recipient, and use rather than rely on the slogan.

Disclosure and disclaimers provide different kinds of information. Reports can identify receipts, contributors covered by the governing rule, expenditures, dates, and recipients. A disclaimer printed or spoken in a communication identifies who paid and whether a candidate authorized it. Naming the sponsor does not necessarily reveal every original donor behind that sponsor. Conversely, a fully reported outside advertisement can remain independent; transparency is not coordination.

Disclosure serves voter-information, enforcement, and anti-circumvention interests, but it can burden privacy and association. Courts may consider a demonstrated threat of harassment while treating disclosure differently from a cap on spending. Duties also depend on the organization and communication. Money can pass through several entities, and reports may reveal the final spender, a donor to that spender, or a person who funded the particular communication. Those levels should not be collapsed. If an advertisement names a nonprofit while general donors remain unknown, a sponsor disclaimer and dark-money concern can coexist. Ask exactly which source is visible, through which filing or statement, and which rule required it.

Video lesson: Campaign finance | Political participation | US government and civics | Khan Academy