Interesting development: Kentucky state Sen. Damon Thayer (R) has introduced a bill to increase the frequency of campaign finance disclosure reports that candidates must submit in an effort to boost transparency of campaign finances. Incidentally, Thayer is the same Senator who worked to get rid of the public financing program for gubernatorial campaigns that Kentucky had.
His rationale for supporting one measure but not the other is interesting:
When asked about his support for more reporting requirements while opposing public financing, Thayer said it reflects the reality that money is a part of politics.
Is it really an absolute? Money's role in politics has grown more dominant through the years, but that's hardly a trend we should accept as inevitable. If you support transparency, you clearly see the potential for money to corrupt the political process so why oppose efforts to limit its influence?