Essay 7

Essay 7




A: The proposal of raising limits on individual contributions would drastically change how politics in America works, if passed. The idea is that by raising the limit an individual can donate, the rich could give substantially more and the rest of the U.S. population wouldn't be as limited either. This creates an opportunity for politicians to gain more money quicker, allowing them to further their campaign with the help of motivated supporters.


Supporters of this raise in individual contributions argue that, by allowing higher donations, the candidates would be able to receive substantially more money and thus build a stronger and better run campaign.


However, some say by allowing more money into the campaign from individual contributors, an unfair advantage is given to some candidates over others. Candidates with rich backers have a much stronger campaign and so a higher chance of winning.









B: Soft money is money donated to a certain political party rather than the political candidate themselves. By eliminating soft money contributions, political election financing problems also get solved.


Those that argue for the elimination of soft money contributions say that although the money is donated to the party, the parties beliefs are so closely tied to that of the candidate, the special interest groups are pretty much giving a direct contribution.


Others argue that "Soft Money" contributions are a fundamental part of American politics and by banning it, given constitutional rights are being taken away.