What is campaign finance reform, and why does it upset conservatives so much?

I've read about McCain/Feingold on wikipedia and on other sites and I don't really understand what it is and why conservatives dislike it. Could you please dumb it down for me? ThanksWhat is campaign finance reform, and why does it upset conservatives so much?
It has to do with campagin money. Most people who support Republicans are business people and wealthy people. They dont want to see their contibutions turned away.





So republicans get money from businesses while democrats get it from private donations / unions (with about 90% coming from unions).





So this reform would limit soft money. What is soft money (aka soft donation)? it is when you donate to the republican / democrat PARTY and they in turn buy ads to promote their canidate.





I find the preivous answers funny as Obama was shown to spend over 2 times the amount that McCain did on ads and even more of a ratio when it came to smear ads.





The point being, is that it should be my right as an american to give as much money as i see fit to whomever i want. This would limit that freedom to only X amount of dollars. It also would then give more power to the worker over the business owner, giving the worker more say over the economy.





If you ever wondered what that voice sounds like, it sounds like communism. I hate to bring that word out, but every communist revolution has ALWAYS been from the workers. In fact you need a very strong lower and middle class to even get it started.





America has not has this issue becuase for the longest time, most people were business owners busting their balls for income, so any tax that hurt their income they would vote it down. But more and more people are not doing their own business but instead living their life on a job. So now people who do jobs think that real work means 40 hours a week, earning money for someone else, and then they wonder, ';if i put this many hours at work, why do i get paid so little?';... a smart person would say that you should start your own business then, but with this entitlement generation, they instead want more incentives to continue to just work and not start a business.





That is why things like medicare, social security, and almost any welfare program is started, to help those who are not willing to put forth the effort to actually own a business.





If everyone owned a business, i swear our laws would all fully support free market, but it is the worker than wants restrictions.





Anyway, republicans dislike it becuase for every business owner making a donation, there are about 100 works making a donation too. If you limit the donation to 100 bucks, then that means the workers can donate 10,000 dollars but the company can only donate 100. Does that sound fair? When the workers have more power over the business than the business owner themselves?What is campaign finance reform, and why does it upset conservatives so much?
Campaign finance is about the Presidential Candiates accepting public funds.....which means they are ONLY allowed to spend $86 Million EACH.


And that's it...no more.





The purpose is to prevent special interst groups from funneling millions of dollars to one candidate, which would give that candidate an unfair advantage in the campaign.











Both McCain and Obama promised to accept Public funding, and only McCain kept that promise.


Obama raised almost $700 Million, and many were from illegal donators - including from his aunt, who is an illegal alien.
The basic issue that Conservatives have with McCain/Fiengold is that it limits freedom of speech.





They feel that the government has no business restricting political speech even if it is in the form of paid political advertisements.





Of course it is ironic that liberals criticise conservatives on this issue when Obama broke a campaign promise that he would accept government campaign funding if McCain did.
Money has gotten so important in our politics that we no longer have elections, we have -auctions-. Whichever candidate spends the most money wins about 95% of the time.





This means that politicians have a conflict of interest. They have promised to represent the interests of all the people, but they also have to raise literally thousands of dollars a day if they expect to be re-elected, and fundraising often takes up most of their time. In fact, since they need to be well-funded before the media even will take them seriously, that means that before you even -see- a candidate he's already sold out.





And, since both parties get their money from the same sources, you can't expect their real agenda to be all that much different. They are both really the same party beneath the skin.





It's always the party on the outs that's trying to reform this system. For many years the Republicans had lot more money, so it was the Democrats who wanted campaign finance reform. Now it's the other way around. President Nixon spent $20 million to get elected in 1968. Obama spent $600 million! He outspent McCain by something like 5 to 1.





To make matters worse, the Supreme Court decided that spending money was covered by free speech. So if one candidate is backed by the Oil Industry or the Health Insurance Industry, they can promote him however much they'd like. AND the candidate with the most money is 'coronated' as the winner by the press long before the election, and all the other candidate are treated as also-rans.





What we really need in the US is federal financing of elections. Every serious candidate gets $25 million, and that's all he can spend, and whatever he doesn't spend goes back to the govt. afterwards. It would cost us a little but it would be WELL worth it, to put candidates on equal ground. Also broadcasting stations that use the public airwaves would be required to give candidates some time, maybe 5 min. each on Sunday night, and that's all the TV time they can have except for news and debates and stuff like that. Too many elections are won by storms of very slimy, misleading 30-seconds ads in the last few days of the election, raising issues that opponents don't have time to explain.





In the next few years, as the Republicans get used to their minority status, you're going to see impassioned calls from Republicans for campaign finance reform.
It is bad legislation and infringes on our freedom of speech rights! But as a Leftie I am sure you are OK with shutting up dissenters!





Who was it in the last campaign who had to give back money? Oh that would be Hillary and Obama!





Who was it that was getting campaign contributions from people such as Mickey Mouse, D. Duck etc..... so that they could not be traced? Oh that would be Obama!
You got it backwards. Conservatives are for campaign reform. Look at the last campaign... it was Obama that broke his pledge about accepting contributions.
it is the possible way candidates collect money the democrats find ways to hide the fact that they are receiving illegal funds
Conservatives need massive amounts of cash to sell their propaganda and don't want any part of a bill that might limit their donations from corporations and lobbyists.


Keep in mind, that without attack ads, and fearmongering, and swiftboating, Republicans can't win elections.
';Conservatives'; are wetting their little beds in fear and trembling these days - but campaign finance reform is a BIG SCARY one for republicans - no more bribes!!! Are you kidding??!!
EVERYTHING upsets or scares conservatives these days.
They won't have the lobbyist money to grease their wheels anymore. In short, they'll have to be honest.