The necessity for candidates for public office to gather money in order to mount effective campaigns has raised concerns that campaign contributions may give some individuals and groups improper influence on the selection of public officials and the making of public policy. Part of this concern stems from the pluralist theory that maintains that every group which has an interest and is willing to compete by the accepted rules can have some influence on public policy, and growing out of this theory is a claim that the "public good" in the old republican sense, does not exist in a meaningful way in United States society today. Instead of seeking a substantive public good, pluralism argues, we should focus on perfecting procedural guarantees that every group can make itself heard on issues about which it cares. This pluralist point of view almost completely reverses Madison's view that factions militated against the public good. Whether the old republican view of factions or the pluralist view of groups is valid is perhaps the key issue at the heart of current debates over amending the Constitution to allow limitations on campaign contributions and spending. Included are arguments for and against an amendment that would allow limits on campaign expenditures. (BZ)