Final answer:
Campaign behavior for the HPSB PAC that would be against current law includes making direct contributions to candidates, coordinating with campaigns, and not complying with transparency rules set by BCRA.
Step-by-step explanation:
The HPSB PAC would be acting against current law if it were to engage in direct contributions to candidates or coordination with a candidate's campaign. According to the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, while Super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to support or oppose candidates, they are prohibited from contributing money directly to individual candidates or coordinating with their campaigns. Additionally, although these committees can engage in independent expenditures, they must operate without the candidates' involvement to maintain the independence of their advocacy efforts, thus avoiding conflicts of interest for the elected officials.
Moreover, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) imposes rules to ensure transparency in political donations and restricts certain types of political advertising leading up to an election. Super PAC activities that fail to comply with BCRA requirements, particularly in terms of disclosure and advertising bans, would also be considered illegal. Therefore, any behavior by the HPSB PAC that involves direct financial contributions to candidates, coordination with campaigns, or evasion of disclosure rules would be against the law.