Amazon.com Widgets

Should more limitations be placed on how advocacy groups participate in the election process?

  • Less Donations More Real Representation

    I believe more limitations should be placed on how advocacy groups participate in the election process. This category, I would assume includes all of the advocates, all of the companies, and all of the lobbyists. We need to get these people out of the election process so we can hear the candidates and their platforms, in a honest format without pressure from these different groups.

  • They have too much influence

    Advocacy groups have far too much influence. They are in fact ways for the rich who have a lot of money to influence elections with far more power than their individual vote ever could. It is different if advocacy groups are supporting or reporting to a particular candidate, but when a group exists only to attack someone, politics suffers in general.

  • Better a free for all.

    No, more limitations should not be placed on how advocacy groups participate in the election process, because it's impossible to police. It's better just to allow it to be a free for all. Groups should be able to say whatever they want to say. Any kind of enforcement of rules would only be done in a political manner.

  • No, I don't think more limitations should be placed on how advocacy groups can participate in the election process.

    I think there are already a large amount of restrictions on how advocacy groups can participate in elections in both financial and advertising regards, I think that we should be constantly monitoring the election process and make sure that no group abuses these rules and is not punished for doing so.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.