Campaign Finance and Political Funding
Campaign finance in America is vastly different from the UK system. The landmark Citizens United vs FEC (2010) Supreme Court ruling said restricting corporate spending on elections violated free speech rights. This created Super PACs - groups that can raise unlimited money to support candidates.
FECA (1974) tried to limit contributions - individuals can give maximum £2,700, groups £5,000. But there are massive loopholes: soft money from interest groups isn't regulated, and candidates can reject federal funding limits entirely.
The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (2002) banned soft money and restricted corporate-funded adverts, but Citizens United overturned much of this. By 2023, there were 2,476 Super PACs raising £2.7 billion.
Groups like the NRA heavily fund Republican candidates, raising serious questions about whether wealthy donors have excessive influence over democracy. The system creates inequality where candidates' fundraising ability often matters more than their ideas.
Critical Question: Does unlimited spending protect free speech, or does it give the wealthy unfair control over elections?