The argument for campaign finance reform is nothing new. It is the view of the reformers that candidates running for political offices are bought by their contributors, thereby making these candidates, when in office, the contributor's puppets at the expense of other constituents and the public. Moreover, more money means more of a voice on the campaign trail which leads to an imbalance of information for the voters. But as the latest round of debate rages on, it is the author's position that ultimately efforts to regulate campaign finances will not work.

The reasons for reformation, although sound, conflict with the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and participation in the political process. Although campaign financing reformation is "pleasing to the ears," it is dangerous and threatening to our nation's traditional notions of free speech and political participation. The author discusses the proposed bills to eliminate the "loopholes" in the regulations currently and emphasizes that these loopholes can never be plugged completely without the loss of some political freedoms. The article takes you through the origins of the reformation, its aims and the conclusion that it will not work in our democratic nation.