Work

Campaign Finance Regulation: Faulty Assumptions and Undemocratic Consequences

Essay by Bradley A. Smith, published in 1995 as Cato Policy Analysis no. 238 and reprinted by the Hoover Institution.

1 link, 0 backed by primary records

The debate

What it found

helped to entrench incumbents in office while doing nothing to address the allegedly corrupting influence of money in politics.1

Connections 1

Timeline 1 date

13 Sep 1995 Campaign Finance Regulation: Faulty Assumptions and Undemocratic Consequences

Proof 1 source

Campaign Finance Regulation: Faulty Assumptions and Undemocratic Consequences (Cato Policy Analysis no. 238, reprinted by the Hoover Institution), Hoover Institution Press, reprinting the Cato Institute. Scholarship & press
helped to entrench incumbents in office while doing nothing to address the allegedly corrupting influence of money in politics.
Citing the government interest in preventing the “appearance of corruption,” the Court upheld restrictions on the size of campaign contributions but struck down limits on candidate spending and independent expenditures in support of a candidate.
Rather than continue down the path of greater government regulation, the country would be best served by deregulating the electoral process

Page history 1 change