Amazon.com Widgets

Should there be a limit on the cost of election campaigns?

  • Yes, at a certain point it is just wasteful.

    Most other civilized countries put some kind of limit on that amount of money that can be spent on a campaign. After a while, money becomes a corrupting influence that prevents people from evaluating the candidates on their own. It can also drown out good candidates who do not have the same resources. We need equality of opportunity when it comes to elections. Free speech is not limited by saying that there is a maximum that can be spent because money itself is not expression.

  • Yes there should be a limit spent on election campaigns.

    The money used in the election campaign by both candidates and previous drop outs could be put to good use, like out ever growing debt. If there was a limit put on how much they can spend, they would stop buying useless air time to bash the opponent with biased facts.

  • Yes

    That would keep people or candidates from buying an election. Just like in the election that just happened if you have the opportunity to get lots of money from certain voters than you are able to have the upper hand on the other candidate. If it was limited than you would not have to listen to as many commercials either.

  • By All Means

    Yes, there should be a limit on the cost of election campaigns. Candidates should be required to work with a set amount of money for their campaigns. One candidate should not have the right to raise more based solely on his or her popularity. Candidates need to plan their campaigns with a budgeted amount, knowing that is the limit and there will be no more. There is no need to spend outlandish amounts of money – there are people struggling in today’s economy and the millions spent on an election campaigns is unnecessary and sends the wrong message to the American people.

  • Pointless to do so

    Even if the presidential campaigns had a limit on them, the super pacs that support the candidate would be able to raise more money. If the super pacs were to be banned, that would be an infringement on freedom of speech, and they cannot be monitored for their income because they would be a not for profit, thus leading to the commercials and the so called "buying an election". There is no way that I can see that makes everybody equal.


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