The real story, of course, is why?

There are no easy answers in politics. But I would submit that one fundamental reason for Washington's continued failure to respond to the looming challenges we face is that our elected leaders are hamstrung by the special interests who fund their campaigns. Our leaders have become paralyzed by the flood of money showered on them by a small minority of self-interested contributors who have the means and incentive to control how Congress does business.

In 2010, less than one half of one percent of Americans were responsible for 80 percent of all contributions made to candidates for federal office. A closer look at the numbers is even more sobering. Consider that the healthcare industry http://www.acrreform.org/research/healthcare-industry-money-in-politics/ - - $311 million in 2008 . Or that the energy industry has http://www.acrreform.org/ - - Fair Elections Now Act , newly-introduced legislation that would match small donations from constituents with public funds, ensuring that any candidate who foregoes large donations from special interests has enough money to run a competitive campaign. I predict that candidates will embrace this choice when it is law. And survey after survey shows that voters will embrace candidates who opt for small donor-driven public funding when they see the emphasis shift from the deep pockets of special interests to the small contributions from a candidate's own constituents.

Past attempts at campaign finance reform have fallen short because they have relied on placing limits and restrictions on campaign donations. This strategy has been unsuccessful because, time after time, the restrictions that are put in place are simply avoided by adept legal maneuvering. Put a barrier on one type of contribution, and the money inevitably finds a new way into campaign coffers. The Supreme Court has also repeatedly declared that restrictions on campaign contributions are a violation of our First Amendment.

The http://www.fairelectionsnow.org/ -

Fair Elections will not place restrictions on those who opt to fund their campaign the traditional way because it doesn't have to. If a publicly funded candidate can earn enough in matching funds to run a competitive race, it doesn't matter if any of her opponents spend significantly more. A http://www.acrreform.org/research/does-money-buy-elections/ - - Americans for Campaign Reform , along with former Senators Bill Bradley, Warren Rudman, and Alan Simpson.