One interesting part of campaign finance is that there's no limit on what a candidate can contribute to his own campaign. Wealthy presidential hopefuls Ross Perot and Steve Forbes donated substantial chunks of their own fortunes. Mitt Romney, a candidate in the presidential race, has been the largest donor to his own campaign by a wide margin. The Federal Elections Campaign Act (FECA) of 1971 prohibits corporations and incorporated charitable organizations from giving to or spending for a candidate. However, PACs are a good way for corporations to dodge this law. It seems like for every regulation in place, there's a loophole that allows groups to bypass it. Bundling is another tactic used to skirt the regulations of the FEC. Bundling is when an individual gathers contributions from a large number of people and donates the money all at once to a campaign. The …show more content…
Thirty states have made substantial changes to their campaign finance laws in the last 15 years. Maine has pushed for public financing for all elections. Washington state requires online spending disclosure. Many states have lobbied for shorter campaign periods, voluntary spending limits and contribution caps with great success. By making spending limits voluntary, states are able to avoid violating the terms of the Buckley v. Valeo ruling. Some states limit contributions from individuals to PACs and from PACs to candidates. Unions and corporations are heavily monitored and limited in their influence, with Texas and Alaska prohibiting them from spending on a candidate's behalf altogether. Every state but Louisiana requires that campaign ads disclose who paid for them, and most mandate that ads paid for by organizations outside the campaign indicate that the candidate didn't authorize the ad. The same holds true for all radio and print