Specifically, this means that it is illegal for corporations and labor unions to spend over certain amounts of money in connection with federal elections. For further explanation, since 1974 it has also been illegal for an individual to contribute more than $1000.00 to a federal candidate or more than $20000.00 per to a political party. In 1978 the Federal Election Commission made an administrative ruling which made it hazy as to what the definition of "soft money" actually was. And during the Dukakis and bush campaigns of 1988 both parties began to aggressively pursue soft money fundraising according to an independent research study of "soft money" web site. Apparently, the administrative ruling from the Federal Election Commission in 1978 created a loophole in the law. And since this "loophole" was created there has been an explosion of "soft money" fundraising. For example, in 1992 it was estimated that there was an estimated $86 million worth of "soft money" connected to the entire presidential election. In the 1996 election that number tripled to an incredible $260 million estimated "soft money" connection to that political year. It should be obvious that "soft money" is a growing problem and dare I say threat to our system and idea of "free" elections in the United States. I want to briefly discuss three aspects of "soft money" in financing political campaigns, and in that discussion touch on a United States Supreme Court opinion decided on December 10th of 2003 in McConnell Vs. The Federal Election Commission. The three aspects I want to discuss are: where "soft money" comes from, how it affects modern politics and law making, and finally, what can be done to stop "soft money" in federal campaigning. .
The First aspect of this argument I want to focus on is where this "soft money" comes from. According to information in a textbook titled, American Public Policy: An Introduction, the biggest expenditures of "soft money" comes from special interest groups (Cochran et al.