The reforms limited the possibilities for campaign financing

[soniya55531]

The creation of various groups and the actions of society are solidified in the conception of the right to freedom of expression, monitoring and supervision of public power . It was precisely in the face of diversity (of peoples, ideologies and causes) that interest groups emerged, in order to ensure basic principles of civil rights, for example. Representation also emerged so that minorities in society could have their interests achieved.


With pluralism, groups could be organized based on people's interests. However, with the explosion in the number of activities of all types of organizations, what seemed to have been a solution gave rise to the creation of a new problem. Groups with high purchasing power, which had funding, began to get more attention. In a pluralistic democracy, some groups had excessive privileges in influencing certain issues.


One example of this is that the disparity in capital between russia mobile database groups allowed some organizations to obtain better results in terms of their power of influence in relation to sponsored political campaigns. Privileges like this permeated society, causing a great imbalance.


In Brazil, since the electoral reform, private financing of electoral campaigns has been prohibited, forcing political parties to seek other ways to deal with the reduction in funding. To minimize this issue, the Special Campaign Financing Fund (FEFC) was approved with the political reform.


Despite this, the measure brought about a paradox; wealthy candidates began to be privileged both in their campaigns and in the reach of their communication.


The reform, therefore, has once again placed interest groups in a position of considerable imbalance. For this reason, acting strategically and strengthening one's position, with clear and unbeatable arguments, is essential to minimize the strength of economic power that gives some greater access to decision-makers.