Almost half of all Americans believe the current campaign financing system brought about by the Citizens United decision has hurt presidential elections, a new poll has found.
According to a
Monmouth University poll conducted July 9-12 of 1,001 adults, 48 percent of Americans think that the influx of cash in the aftermath of the 2010 ruling has made the presidential nominating process worse than in the past, and four in 10 people feel that the looser rules benefit otherwise unqualified candidates.
Just 10 percent say the changes brought about by the decision have improved the nominating process, while 29 percent say it has had no impact.
"The public is starting to worry that the Wild West nature of campaign finance is damaging the way we choose presidential candidates," Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, said in a statement.
Americans are more divided about whether the rules help or hurt good candidates running viable campaigns for the White House. Twenty-eight percent said that the current climate makes it more likely that a qualified candidate with lower name identification could grab voters' attention and stay in the race.
But 27 percent believe that the current campaign finance rules make it less likely that a candidate with lower name recognition could thrive. Thirty-four percent think the funding environment has no impact on a qualified candidate.
The poll also found that 44 percent of people think campaigns should be financed by a combination of public and private funding. Thirty-three percent said it should come from private donations alone, while 17 percent believes it should be fully publicly funded.
Politico reported earlier this month that concerns are mounting that the post-Citizens United environment could distort the 2016 presidential race by giving a lifeline to second- and third-tier candidates at the expense of front-runners.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.