>> better up rid it's time to play ball. get ready to cheer on your favorite team in the congressional base login. where republicans face off against democrats. watch for live coverage at nationals park. 7:00 p.m. on c-span. the mobile video app or online at c-span.org. >> deep to left field and bouncing up into the bullpen. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government funded by these television companies and more, including media calm. on " continues. host: with just under 150 days

until election day, a conversation on campaign finance laws, political fundraising, our guest is saurav ghosh of the campaign legal center. mr. ghosh, remind folks first what the campaign legal center is, what your mission with just under 150 days until election day, conversation on finance laws, fundraising, our guest from the hennepin medical center. our focus first with the campaign legal center is what your mission is. >> the campaign legal center is a nonpartisan nonprofit. we advocate for every voters right to responsive government and meaningful participation in that democratic process took >> since we are talking about money in this segment, how is the campaign legal center funded? >> we are funded with a combination of individual and and additional donors we actually do not take money from political antedates or packs or anything like that. we disclose on our website, every donation above $200 for up to a year early in the interest of trance currency.

>> what is the campaign-finance form director doing? >> what do i do? a combination of watchdog report and reform advocacy. on the watchdog side, my team and i look for violations of the federal campaign-finance laws, and file complaints with the federal election commission or other regulators as of.. urging that these regulators enforce the law. and on the reform side, where we see areas of campaign finance law that could be stronger or have potential gaps, we try to identify those and work with members of congress to essentially fill those gaps. >> we were talking campaign- finance. suddenly there's lots of different kinds of money. some different definitions what is dark money? >> it's not a term of hours, per se, but it refers to any kind of money spent on

elections that is dark in terms of the voters ability to note the source, right? so essentially any money where you cannot trace it back to who is trying to influence the election. one of the main vehicles for dark money is the 501(c) for, which is any type of entity that's nonprofit status and therefore does not have to disclose it donors. despite claiming to be a nonprofit, they are essentially engaging in social welfare to spend money directly on elections. >> what are the types of entities that viewers would not know what >> americans for prosperity is a long running dark money nonprofit. there's a whole bunch of them. there is one called future 45. supporting president biden in this election. they tend to be opaque and obscure names that's one of the ways in which they operate.

they have a name that is easy for forgetting and does not mean a whole lot. >> it's not illegal? >> it is not illegal. just an area where transparency in the election process could be a lot stronger. as you imagine, that's one of the areas where often advocating that congress should require disclosure of not profit spending money on elections. they should be required to disclose that. >> what is off money? >> soft money, though it sounds the same, very different. basically any money that does not comply with federal election laws. laws governing contribution limits, prohibition on her part contributions. the requirement that the money be disc closed on disclosure reports. anyone who does not comply with those garments is what we refer to a soft money. >> what is the bigger problem in campaign financing? the role of dark money and not enough transparent, or this

soft money? >> i think dark money is probably a far bigger problem. transparency about who is spending money to influence elections is really one of the bedrock and sepals of pain finance law york voters have a fundamental right to know who is spending money to influence their vote and they have a right to know who is packing. antedates when evaluating their choices and deciding who they want to support politically dark money fundamentally undermines that right and ensures that a large amount of the elections bending happening on our day-to-day lives is actually not disclosed. it's impossible for the average voter or reporter to know where the money has come from. >> what has the campaign legal center asked congress to do right now to address some of these problems? and how much incentive is there for members of congress to make changes in the campaign-finance law that might make it harder

for them to raise money or have to report it in different ways that they may not want to report it? >> i think the question of will congress act were what is their incentive, it took at the end of the day, you are asking them to impose more requirements on themselves rid perhaps limits the ways in which they are able to money. there are reformers in congress who see that is out of the public interest, part of what's good for not only government, but for the people. as far as how to address dark money, a pretty ready-made solution for that already exist. it's called the disc does act. it's a bill that has long been endorsed. it is sponsored and put forward by senator sheldon whitehouse for many years. i don't even know how long. it's a bill that would fundamentally require disclosure of money spent by nonprofit and other kinds of entities and require the trace back of any of that spending to

the originals horse. >> we are talking campaign- finance amount fundraising york a great time to call in if this is a confusing topic or you have ever had a western on it. we are joined by mr. ghosh from the legal center. he can answer those westerns for you. how long have you been doing this work? >> since about 2015. >> is with us for a while longer. democrats: or republicans and colon. and for independence. we will also look for your text send your comments on social media, as well. the last time that congress addressed this issue in a big way, there may have been smaller bills between. but the 2002 bipartisan campaign reform act, as it is known here, what did it do?

>> it was actually addressing the soft money issue that we were talking about a moment ago. before this, a lot of state- level organizations were able to raise money out side of the federal camp in finance framework and spend that money influencing federal elections. so this was congress effort to rein in that spending. basically what it says, one of the most important provisions, is that federal candidates cannot raise and spend soft money in elections. >> so this happens in 2002. citizens united happens in 2010. what did citizens united decide what >> that was a supreme court decision that physically opened the doors to corporate expenditures in our elections. that had been riveted for decades. close to a century. the supreme court in that decision said -- >> we are leaving to hear from amtrak ceo stephen gardner, board chair tony kosher on

passenger rail safety and oversight live coverage of the subcommittee hearing here on c- span 3.

>> we're standing by for the start of this house hearing on passenger rail and safety oversight. we'll hear from amtrak's stephen gardner and tony coscia. two lawmakers have announcedamtrak related bills. infrastructure subcommittee chair, tony knells, would require amtrak to operate under the same rules as other government operated entities. the story says mark melanaro of new york has a measure that would require amtrak to publicly disclose the awarding of bonuses. the bill would require an

explanation of the method used to determine bonuses for ceo, president, and a number of executive vice president positions. this transportation infrastructure subcommittee hearing suspected to get underway shortly live here on c- span 3.