BUCKLEY v. VALEO Per Curiam C. Expenditure Limitations The Act's expenditure ceilings impose direct and substantial restraints on the quantity of political speech. The most drastic of the limitations restricts individuals and groups, including political parties that fail to place a candidate on the ballot,44 to an expenditure of $1,000 "relative to a clearly identified candidate during a Other expenditure ceil§ 608 (e) (1). calendar year." ings limit spending by candidates, § 608 (a), their campaigns, § 608 (c), and political parties in connection with election campaigns, § 608 (f). It is clear that a primary effect of these expenditure limitations is to restrict the quantity of campaign speech by individuals, groups, and candidates. The restrictions, while neutral as to the ideas expressed, limit political expression "at the core of our electoral process and of the First Amendment freedoms." Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U. S. 23, 32 (1968). 1. The $1,000 Limitation on Expenditures "Relative to a Clearly Identified Candidate" Section 608 (e)(1) provides that "[n]o person may make any expenditure .. relative to a clearly identified candidate during a calendar year which, when added to all other expenditures made by such person during the year advocating the election or defeat of such candidate, exceeds $1,000." "' The plain effect of § 608 (e) (1) is to 44 See n. 19, supra. 4- The same broad definition of "person" applicable to the contribution limitations governs the meaning of "person" in § 608 (e) (1). The statute provides some limited exceptions through various exclusions from the otherwise comprehensive definition of "expenditure." See § 591 (f). The most important exclusions are: (1) "any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate," § 591 (f) (4)