Currently, the platform's statement on campaign spending reads as follows:

"We support campaign finance laws that will limit the influence of moneyed special interests."

This camp is for those who believe that language should be revised to read as follows:

"We support full transparency in all campaign spending and donations, and we call for the repeal of laws that limit spending and donations, as we consider such to be violations of the right to free speech."

___

Campaign finance limits have been a topic of controversy in political circles for decades. The argument for campaign finance limits is that it prevents wealthy individuals and organizations from dominating the political process and giving them an unfair advantage over other candidates. However, the reality is that campaign finance limits do more harm than good, as they restrict free speech, limit competition, and create unintended consequences that ultimately harm democracy. In contrast, a system of full transparency and no spending limits is the best solution for campaign finance reform.

Campaign finance limits are inherently unfair as they restrict the ability of individuals and organizations to express their political views. These limits violate the fundamental right of free speech and restrict the ability of individuals to support candidates or issues they believe in. This limitation on free speech is particularly harmful to underfunded or less well-known candidates who are unable to get their message out to voters.

In addition, campaign finance limits limit competition, which is vital for a healthy democracy. By restricting the ability of individuals and organizations to donate to political campaigns, these limits effectively make it more difficult for new or alternative candidates to enter the political arena. This limits the choice of candidates and makes it more difficult for voters to make informed decisions.

Moreover, campaign finance limits create unintended consequences that ultimately harm democracy. For example, the limits often push political spending into dark money channels, where wealthy individuals and organizations can donate unlimited amounts of money to political causes without disclosing their identities. This results in a lack of transparency and accountability, which undermines the democratic process.

On the other hand, a system of full transparency and no spending limits would be the best solution for campaign finance reform. Under this system, all political contributions and expenditures would be fully disclosed, allowing voters to see who is funding political campaigns and where the money is going. This transparency would ensure that politicians are accountable to the voters and not just to their donors.

Furthermore, removing spending limits would encourage competition and allow more candidates to enter the political arena. This would allow for a wider range of voices and ideas to be heard, promoting a more robust democratic process.