Individuals across the political spectrum decry the influence of money on political elections. Many want to severely limit campaign contributions, and others would like political campaigns to be financed by tax dollars. But neither of these address the fundamental issue, and indeed, they illustrate the fundamental problem.
The reason that so much money is donated to political campaigns is that so much is at stake. Politicians and bureaucrats wield tremendous power over many businesses and industries. For many businesses, success (and sometimes its very existence) depends on government policies. For example, Obama threatened to destroy the coal industry and coal-fired power plants through regulations. Understandably, the companies who were threatened fought back, seeking to elect politicians who would support them. On the other side were the companies who sought subsidies, such as the renewable energy companies. They contributed to political campaigns, not in self-defense, but in order to receive political favors.
Those who donate to political campaigns in an effort to protect their freedom to create material values are very different from those who donate to receive political favors. The former are trying to stop the use of force against them, while the latter seek to use force against competitors, taxpayers, or both. Yet, this distinction is seldom made. Instead, critics decry the money donated to political campaigns, treating all donations as equal.
In a capitalist society, influencing politicians through campaign donations would be pointless. Politicians would not have the power to regulate an industry out of existence, nor would they have the power to grant an industry special favors. Politicians, like private citizens, would be prohibited from initiating force. If we want to get money out of politics, then we must first get politicians out of our wallets.