American citizens are becoming fed up with the amount of money that’s being spent on political campaigns. The elections appear to be going to the highest bidder. Either rich candidates are spending their own seemingly endless fortunes, or they’re being funded by special interest groups. Is the election process being wrenched from the hands of the voters?
Some efforts have been made to curb and regulate campaign spending, even as far back as 1867. But the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1972 was the first successful legislation for campaign finance reform. Part of the act’s provisions required candidates to reveal who contributed to their campaigns and how much they spent. In 1974, the Federal Election Commission Act added to the reform by capping individual donations at $1,000 and Political Action Committee (PAC) donations to $5,000.
The McCain-Feingold reform, officially called the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, is the latest campaign finance law at the federal level. The act outlawed so-called soft money, unregulated contributions from independent entities or those contributions that don’t go directly to the candidates’ campaigns. Senators McCain and Feingold are still, in 2010, trying to get stronger reform laws passed.
One major obstacle to campaign finance reform is some people and organization’s belief that it violates first amendment constitutional rights. In 1976, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment guarantees the right to contribute to and spend money on political campaigns, which comes from American citizens’ right to self-government and to freedom itself.
Some people feel that the limits should be raised since they haven’t been changed for decades. Opponents believe that increasing the spending limits on campaign contributions will allow wealthier people to buy into the elections, financing candidates and propositions that support their causes. Proponents of raising the limits also say candidates could then spend more time on their duties of office rather than fundraising. Opponents counter that throwing more money into the system won’t help with the current problems.
