Over the past few weeks, I’ve noticed an interesting trend among students at my school: many are becoming increasingly critical of campaign funding. The numbers for this cycle have been objectively insane. Vice President Kamala Harris, for example, raised a billion dollars in just a few short months\u2014an impressive achievement by any measure. However, the criticism lies in the idea that every four years\u2014on a lesser scale, every midterm\u2014we, Americans, pour millions upon millions into politicians. But not for two amazing candidates as many see it, but to support the lesser of two evils and to mitigate damage. This argument against funding has its merits, but so does the argument for it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
First, against funding, many question why we can\u2019t use this money for some other purpose or why it just has to be that much money. Every two years, we spend millions for one election cycle or another. Then we panic about our new president for a few years and promptly get back into the next presidential cycle, not to mention the midterms before that. It seems wasteful to say the least, especially when so many find the candidates\u2014whom we pour so much money into\u2014unsatisfactory. I sympathize with the view that maybe we should cut back, at least just a bit, and have this money either redirected elsewhere or simply leave it in the pockets of the American people from which it came.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On the other hand, there\u2019s a compelling argument for funding. Donations, after all, can be seen as a form of free speech. You vote with your wallet and you show your opinions and your support with your wallet. While it makes sense to restrict the influence of large corporations to prevent them from buying elections, it also makes sense to preserve the right to free speech for ordinary citizens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ultimately, I find the practice to be wasteful, but nonetheless important. Money is important to run campaigns and donations are a form of speech. I believe if we are to continue to have democratic elections, then campaign funding is an unavoidable reality. Funding makes such a big difference in elections and it\u2019s now an integral part of our election processes. However, I do believe there could be steps we could take that would cut down on the excess while keeping those core aspects of campaign donations in place. I believe this would largely have to manifest in the form of further restrictions on corporations and the ultra-rich since they are the largest spenders but simultaneously represent one of the tiniest portions of people. One idea could be a matching system, where donations from everyday citizens help determine the amount big corporations and billionaires can donate. This is by no means an end all be all, but it\u2019s one worth considering as we look for ways to strike a balance between free speech and fairness in the election process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Over the past few weeks, I’ve noticed an interesting trend among students at my school: many are becoming increasingly critical of campaign funding. The numbers for this cycle have been objectively insane. Vice President Kamala Harris, for example, raised a billion dollars in just a few short months\u2014an impressive achievement by any measure. However, the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":469,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"single-no-separators","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[15,17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-431","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-economy","category-politics"],"yoast_head":"\n