Corruption In Political Campaigns

Words: 1236
Pages: 5

After a thirty year stall in campaign finance reform legislation, the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (known as the BCRA) reignited the legal debate in 2002 (Fuller). One of the law’s key goals was to regulate the use of soft money in politics. The FEC defines soft money as, “money raised outside the limits and prohibitions of federal campaign finance law” (Campaign Finance Law). Before the BCRA, political groups could raise as much money as they wanted under the guise of voter registration efforts, and then spend the money elsewhere (Fuller). Another major aspect of the BCRA was its ban on electioneering. Now, political organizations were forbidden from airing, “…ads that refer to a clearly identified federal candidate and are …show more content…
I disagree with the argument that without the ability to donate millions of dollars to individual candidates, or spend them on their behalf, wealthy campaign donors would face undue restrictions on their free speech. Personally, it seems that by limiting their contributions we would amplify the voices and importance of middle and lower class voters so much that the net effect would be beneficial. In terms of the research I have conducted on the matter, I have found that corruption has been a factor in American politics throughout history and that people will always find a way to get what they want – if you have enough influence to alter the course of an election you’re not going to give it up without a fight. The fight to remove the disproportionate influence that wealthy campaign donors have on our political system is ongoing and ever changing – whenever one side gains a legal advantage, they quickly lose it. Campaign finance reform is a fight for the future of American politics and, while corruption is inevitable, it is our duty to limit the influence of money to the maximum extent