The logic of election contribution laws

[noztnac]

I don't really understand the logic behind limiting donations of private citizens but of letting candidates donate unlimited amounts to their own campaigns.

I realize the law is written to allow Romney, for example, to donate millions to his own campaign, while I am only allowed to give $2,300 to Ron Paul's campaign.

Doesn't this give Romney a huge advantage interms of political leverage over me?

I don't get it.

[brandon]

I dont know all sides of this argument, but here is one point in favor of contribution limits...

If there were no donation limits, corrupt corporations would donate millions to a candidate, knowing they will get it back in subsidies if the candidate wins.

Corp's still do this anyway, but they have to find loopholes.

[Zarxrax]

Interestingly, if ALL campaign contributions were banned, then only a candidate with true grassroots support, like Ron Paul could have a shot.
Of course, that trounces all over people's personal freedom do do what they wish with their money.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I don't really understand the logic behind limiting donations of private citizens but of letting candidates donate unlimited amounts to their own campaigns.

I realize the law is written to allow Romney, for example, to donate millions to his own campaign, while I am only allowed to give $2,300 to Ron Paul's campaign.

Doesn't this give Romney a huge advantage interms of political leverage over me?

I don't get it.

There is no logic, that's the problem.