one reason some argue that campaign financing should be restricted it is because supporting a candidate is considered free speech. the constitution limits the influence of citizens on elections. limitations make the wealthy less influential. restrictions allow for greater influence by fewer corporations.

The answer is: limitations make the wealthy less influential

The wealthy citizens could influence the outcome of the election by funding the campaign of the representatives that they can control. This would help them in term of advertisement and reach more voters. When the number of financing is limited, the wealthy individuals would have less government representatives in their pocket.

colony: virginia

1: 1607,john smith

2: british were looking for gold and land

3: near oceans and theres forests

4: fishing? ithink

5: sometimes

the anti federalists was a movement that was opposed to the creation of a us federal government. although they were not as organized as the federalists, they also had a large group of leaders, especially in state politics.

the statement "now, in a large extended country, it is impossible to have a representation, possessing the sentiments, and of integrity, to declare the minds of the people” represents the concerns of the anti federalists.

they strongly believed that the federalists were representing the interests of aristocratic elements of society at the expense of the majority of ordinary people, who lived in a rural society.

their fear for the creation of a strong federal government and the president’s power of veto in their opinion would create a tyrannical rule that would dominate the people. they defended the importance of restraining the government’s power towards people at any cost.