The necessity of a monetary cap on U.S. campaign and election funds may introduce a new aspect to politics and the voting process. In a nation that advocates public donations to be given to political parties, many campaigns are determined by the amount of funds each party has, thus preventing parties with less funds to be heard. Though not every election result has been based on the amount of funds, a cap on donations is quintessential in eliminating this factor from cloaking the true intentions of political parties. Such a concept must be thought about, for it can be beneficial if used properly. The introduction of a limit or cap on campaign and election funds will offer an opportunity for these events to run at a pace that is determined by words, not by the looks of the running candidates. This can provide chances for other political entities to rise and prevent backstage binding deals from happening between parties and private enterprises.

The introduction of a cap into campaign funds can be instrumental in making American politics lean more towards content of words, rather than image. Politics nowadays are heavily dependent on the supply of resources, from advertisements to sponsorships that each party receives. With a tendency of voters to side with those who have greater funds, a cap may restrict the sway of votes.

To ensure maximum equality during political campaigns, a regulated distribution must take place. Each party would receive equal funds, which would be generated from taxes and revenue, not through donations. This is done by pooling the given money and distributing it as evenly as possible to three political parties. As to other parties, all must compete for one of the three spots that would receive the funds. However, though the system is designed to put everyone at equal footing, the amount of media coverage each receives may depend on how the party distributes the cash. But the cap will nevertheless usher in a new atmosphere into politics.

Providing equal opportunities for each qualified candidate is an objective that can be accomplished through the usage of a cap on funds. The definition of a cap on campaign funds excludes the means of distributing the money. Therefore, as mentioned before, it is imperative that each party is given nearly the same amount for it to work. The cash may be acquired through taxes and pooled into a trust fund that will be used during election processes.  When funds are equally distributed, with a limit on how much each representative receives, then a campaign will be based on content of ideals rather than budget.

Going further, the implementations of a regulated cap and distribution would eliminate the binding deals behind the scenes. Many elections are often funded by public donations that come from sources with political agendas on their minds. Forced to accept these exuberant amounts of cash, many candidates, upon elections, are tied by those sources and are eventually restricted to a few options. Such inflexibility placed on the president, representative, senate, and other U.S. officials will nevertheless prevent them from achieving full potential. Through the removal of binding factors like the Koch Brothers, whose wealth has financed Libertarian and Conservative campaigns, private enterprises could cease to hinder political figures from executing decisions that would benefit the people of the United States. Presidents and politicians would perform without the thought of appeasing whoever funded their path to office.

It is evident to say that this may pose a barrier to those who believe that the cap would infringe on the U.S. Constitution. Once again, this is not meant to offend the righteousness of the U.S. Constitution. However, a cap and regulated distribution of campaign funds will improve the lives of many; those who are elected into office would win based on their credentials, not by influence or wealth.

The need for change is at hand. With a populous whose votes help sway the political process, the votes should be utilized in a way that would benefit the nation. With regulations on caps and distribution of campaign funds, men and women from all walks of life will have an opportunity to represent the ideals of our nations. To establish competition based on a criteria of accomplishments and qualities, United States campaigns and elections should go through a cap and a regulated distribution.