If campaign spending limits were effective, who would be hurt more, politicans already in office or those attempting to win their first election
Political scientists say that there is no question about this -- the politicians who are attempting to win their first elections would be hurt far more by limiting campaign spending. The reason for this is the importance of name recognition in most political campaigns.
In most political campaigns, the average voter does not know a lot about the candidates. The average voter will often vote for the person that he or she has heard of. Here in Washington State, we had an election some years ago where a person did very well even though she was a complete unknown -- but she had the same name as a famous psychic...
Anyway, if there are limits on campaign spending, it becomes harder for the first timer to get his or her name to be known by the voters. This will give a big advantage to the incumbent. Voters will remember the incumbent's name and it will be much harder for the challenger to gain name recognition because they will be able to spend less money trying to introduce themselves to the voters.