This total is an exasperating amount considering the traditional fall spending boom hasn't occurred yet. Soft money donations are at a 70 percent increase from the 1996 election year. This sort of spending allows a wealthy minority to wield greater control over a candidate than the thousands of voters he or she is supposed to represent. This saturated spending also leads to the continued omission of third party candidates from major venues.
Third parties can no longer afford to effectively contribute to presidential politics.
The moneys spread between the two major political parties must be regulated. Congress, in the past, has set limits on amounts of money coming into a campaign, but recent court decisions on the issue have given leeway into what is now considered soft money. The Federal Election Commission needs to make changes to its policies on allowing candidates, especially those seeking the presidency, to use such moneys on non-issues, and negative advertising against each other. Instead of deciding on where each candidate stands on issues, voters are now being subjected of the choice to which one has the most bells and whistles in campaign ads. T O P 2000, University of South Florida The Oracle Newspaper.