I agree to an extent. For the most part, most, not all, members of congress will do whatever you ask of them if you have the money and a scheme to get it to them. I would love to see just how little it would take. Unfortunately the current laws allow someone with billions of dollars to create several organizations to support candidates directly and indirectly. I see no reason why any organization or company should have to right to donate to a political campeign at all, they don't have the right to vote so why are they allowed to contribute. It is just another way to game the system, and bribe the politicians to do your bidding. It literly happens all the time, all you have to do is compare donations with leglislation introduced to see it, although not all of it. Man meets congressman at party gives check for $10K to PAC, following Tesday, congressman introduces bill to prohibit govt agency from competing with man's website, following weekend at another party, man gives congressman another check for $10K.
Should there be limits on campeign spending? I think so, certainly after the last presidential election. But there should be donation limits, in my opinion. Only registered votors should be allowed to contribute and the limit should be low enough that EVERY registered votor (even the poorist) can give the max. No more than $100 in my opinion, no bundeling, and that is $100 per person, per year TOTAL POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS. Every one must have a valid Name, Address, SSN and Voter ID number for the state they live in. Personally, I think the IRS should be the ones to receive all the checks rather than the candidates themselves, but that is a streach. Limiting contributions will reduce the bribery and corruption, or at least make it easier to find.
Unfortunately, these things will take a constitutional amendment to impliment, you can't pass laws to effectivly restrict congress from anything, they make them go away very quickly and quietly.
Those that remember "ABSCAM" know how easy it is, and how much they (congress) have learned from that and other "Stings" by the FBI. Part of the problem is congress set's the FBI's budget. Too much investigation and Congress cuts their budget. Also remember Heads of agencies, like the FBI are "Appointed by, and server at the pleasure of the President". That means they support the Presidents agenda or they "resign". Of course no one is appointed if the president and cabinet aren't absolutly positive they will tow the line, at all costs.