> Reduce allotted time for campaigning to something like 2 months, and maybe have it publicly funded like Australia

I do want to say that public funding also comes with its issues. Its the way most parties in Argentina fund themselves and because all of them do, all parties get to put their hand of the State coffers during elections. So much, they made an electoral reform to have another round of elections, just to be able to spend more money on pork.

There is no solution to funding political parties that wont screw someone. Its yet another example of diminishing the scope of government so they just steal less of it.

Direct political donations (known as hard money) are already capped in the U.S. Beyond that, the U.S. has a tradition of free speech, which means that direct public funding and limits on general political activity (party building, voter education spending) are unconstitutional. So those cannot be capped.

> Beyond that, the U.S. has a tradition of free speech

As well as a tradition of placing limits on free speech when appropriate.

Which is a larger threat to our country? Democratically elected officials not supporting the views of those that elected them? Or capping the amount of influence a single group can financially have?