The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that limits on the candidates' personal financial contributions violate their First Amendment rights, but limits on others do not. That, to say the least, was illogical. A limit on how much a noncandidate can give to a campaign is as much a violation of his freedom as it would be for the candidate. The limit also helps keep incumbents in power. Challengers with low name recognition may need large contributions from a few donors to take on an incumbent.
Most people think money in politics is a bad thing.
Incumbents and challengers lament how much it takes to mount a campaign. They say they hate to be constantly asking people for money. What's funny is that the same people complain that not enough people are involved in the political process. If more people got involved, perhaps more money would be contributed. Any answer is arbitrary.