I definitely think that campaign finances in the USA should be limited and not expanded. It is something that I think has gotten out of control in recent times. It is necessary that there should be more limitations to just how much campaign finances can be garnered by candidates for the good of society.
The whole Campaign finance system needs to be drastically restructured. I bet politicians spend more time trying to raise money for their campaigns than actually governing the country. They could shorten the campaign time for elections. Do politicians really need to spend 6 months to well over a year running for an election anyway. They just say the same thing over and over again anyway. That could drastically help their campaign costs.
Yes, campaign finances should be more limited in United States elections. The way things are set up now, those who raise and spend the most money often have a greater chance of success. Voting should be based on the opinions of the people, not based on how much money a candidate gets.
The money spent on campaign finance is often littered with corruption and tying of the hands of politicians. This money would be much better spent on causes like feeding the hungry or clothing the poor. Further, this distorts election results towards the richest and most well off candidates, as well.
The idea that, if one cares about saying something enough and has the resources to say it, they will, is something many people support in the abstract. Once faced with the prospect that members who hold opinions different to their own may find ways to express their dissent is something that many do not like in practice. The right to support a platform, a spokesperson, and an idea is something essential to an enlightened nation and limiting the ability of challengers to overcome the incumbent favor is not good for a democratic republic.