This article seems a little misleading. Of course contributions come from many different sources - factory workers, bank employees, lawyers, accountants, etc. But, Clinton has raised considerably more from PACs and lobbiests. I am an accountant, but, if I were to make a political donation, that doesn't necessarily mean I am soliciting any kind of favor from the candidate. The writer keeps comparing monies raised in terms of percentages, saying that there is not much difference between the three. The writer states that Edwards raised 2.5 percent ($537,136) from the health industry. This equates to a total contribution to Edwards of almost $21.5 million. By the same token, if Clinton has raised a total of $90 million (and that is ... More »

The issue is important, and the article provides a little data to illuminate the topic. It fails to address the biggest question, the need for voter-owned publicly financed elections to remove the necessity for candidates whoring after big donors in order to be competitive in the election. Another shortcoming is that it falls into the pettiness of counting dollars without bringing in the relative platform and the history if each candidate on issues that affect the military-industrial media complex, the insurance industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the health care industry, and the corporate oligopolistic control of the media under the blessing of various administrations.

While the financial data is based on a single source, it is a fairly reputable one. Plus the comparisons and conclusions are interesting. Worth the read.