Hi! Thanks for the question.
My answer will first provide a presentation of the criticisms about
the present system of campaign finance. After that I will go through
the proposals being used to provide reforms to this system.
-----------------------
CRITICISMS:
?Critics of U.S. election financing have long targeted private
especially corporate?contributions. The first significant wave of such
criticism arose after Theodore Roosevelt?s successful 1904
presidential race, in which ?it was unmistakably shown [by journalists
and congressional investigators] that large corporations or their
executives? contributed most of the then-unprecedented $2 million that
the Republican party spent on behalf of Roosevelt and its
congressional candidates (Mowry 1958,179).?
?To some, the campaign finance system is thoroughly (or at least
significantly) corrupt. Illegal contributions and spending practices
are portrayed as far outstripping the meager oversight efforts of
executive and legislative regulators.?
?Second, even if campaign fundraising and spending largely conform to
the letter of the law, many reformers view the system and its results
as fundamentally unjust or inequitable. Electoral outcomes, and
subsequent policy making, are seen as being unduly influenced by
private contributions, whose donors are thought to be rewarded by
legislative favors from grateful recipients.?
?Third, the rising cost of national elections is a frequent target of
criticism. This applies both to total spending the record $2 .8
billion lavished on federal campaigns in the 2000 cycle was widely
bemoaned (see, e.g., Marcus 2000)?and to the escalating price tag of
individual races.?
?Fourth and finally, after nearly 30 years of repeated amendments and
numerous court-ordered revisions to FECA, both outside observers and
those involved in campaigns find the present financing system to be
overly complex, even incomprehensible. The rules governing
contributions can be difficult to decipher. ?Soft money? donations to
political parties are subject to much looser regulation?no spending
limits, for example?than are contributions to candidates for office.?
?Influencing the State: US Campaign Finance and its Discontents ...?
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:uJjzwRx6DdwJ:www.ciaonet.org/olj/cr/cr_v15_12_ker01.pdf+criticisms+US+campaign+finance+elections&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
-----------------------------
Reform Proposals:
1. Deregulation
?What is needed is a direct attack on the numerous anticompetitive
features of political markets, not a misguided attack on the symptoms.
The vehicle for reform most often touted by would-be reformers, the
McCain-Feingold/Shays-Meehan campaign fi-nance reform bill, does the
latter. It would actually make political markets less competitive. By
banning soft money, by treating any ad that uses a candidate?s name or
likeness as a political expenditure (and therefore subject to more
stringent regulation), and by strengthening reporting requirements,
giving the Federal Election Commission more enforcement tools, and
increasing penalties, the bill would further strengthen incumbents
over challengers.?
?How Not to Reform Campaign Finance?
http://www.campaignfinancesite.org/proposals/deregulation1.html
Other Articles: http://www.campaignfinancesite.org/proposals/deregulation.html
2. Expenditure Limits
?Expenditure limits are one device intended to control inequalities
between parties and between candidates, to prevent rises in the costs
of politics, and restrict the scope for undue influence and
corruption.?
?Spending limits apply most often only to certain phases and levels of
political activity. They are applied most often to the campaign
expenses of candidates in legislative elections.?
?Expenditure Limits?
http://www.campaignfinancesite.org/proposals/expenditure1.html
3. Clean Money
?Primary funding ? Candidates who meet CMCR requirements and agree not
to raise or spend private money during the primary and general
election campaign periods receive a set amount of money from the Clean
Money fund. Federal candidates also receive a prescribed amount of
free and discounted TV and/or radio time.?
?General election funding ? Candidates who win their party primaries
and qualifying independent candidates who agree to the voluntary
restrictions receive a set amount of general election funding from the
Clean Money fund, as well as additional free and discounted TV and/or
radio time. ?
Details of the Clean Money System are available on our next link.
?Clean Money Campaign Reform?
http://www.campaignfinancesite.org/proposals/cleanreform.html
Other Articles: http://www.campaignfinancesite.org/proposals/clean.html
4. Soft Money Ban
Our next article provides arguments for the constitutionality of
banning ?soft money?, one of the biggest obstacles to campaign finance
reforms.
?Some reform opponents have sought to cast doubt on the
constitutionality of a soft money ban, sometimes referring to the
Supreme Court ruling in Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee
v. FEC, 116 S. Ct. 2309 (1996). However, in Colorado, the Supreme
Court only ruled that it is unconstitutional to limit independent
expenditures by political parties. The decision did not deal with
contributions to political parties. In previous cases, the Supreme
Court consistently has upheld contribution limits - to parties and
PACs, as well as to candidates - as justified to prevent corruption or
the appearance of corruption.?
?Constitutionality of a Soft Money Ban?
http://www.campaignfinancesite.org/proposals/softmoney2.html
Other Articles: http://www.campaignfinancesite.org/proposals/softmoney.html
Search terms used:
campaign finance elections criticisms reform proposals
I hope these links would help you in your research. Before rating this
answer, please ask for a clarification if you have a question or if
you would need further information.
Thanks for visiting us.
Regards,
Easterangel-ga
Google Answers Researcher |
,
0 Comments
)