Political campaign spending has long been a topic of debate in many countries, and it’s no surprise that this issue frequently appears in IELTS Writing Task 2 questions. Based on past exam trends and the current political climate, we can expect to see more questions related to campaign finance regulations in future IELTS tests. Let’s examine a relevant question that has appeared in recent exams:
Some people think that there should be limits on how much money political parties can spend on their campaigns. Others believe that parties should be free to spend as much as they want. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Analysis of the Question
This question asks you to discuss two contrasting views on political campaign spending:
- There should be limits on campaign spending
- Political parties should have no restrictions on spending
You are required to discuss both perspectives and then provide your own opinion on the matter. This type of question falls under the “discuss both views and give your opinion” category, which is common in IELTS Writing Task 2.
Sample Essay 1 (Band 8-9)
The issue of campaign finance regulation is a contentious one in many democratic societies. While some argue for imposing spending caps on political parties, others advocate for unrestricted campaign expenditures. This essay will examine both perspectives before presenting my own viewpoint.
Proponents of spending limits argue that such restrictions level the playing field and prevent wealthy individuals or corporations from exerting undue influence on the electoral process. They contend that unlimited spending can lead to a situation where the candidate with the deepest pockets, rather than the best policies, wins the election. Moreover, capping campaign expenses could encourage politicians to focus more on grassroots engagement and substantive policy discussions instead of relying heavily on expensive advertising campaigns.
On the other hand, those who oppose spending limits argue that such restrictions infringe on freedom of speech and expression. They assert that political parties should have the right to spend as much as they deem necessary to communicate their message to voters. Furthermore, they contend that spending caps may inadvertently benefit incumbent politicians who already enjoy name recognition and media attention, making it harder for newcomers to gain visibility.
In my opinion, while both arguments have merit, I believe that reasonable spending limits are necessary to safeguard the integrity of the democratic process. Unchecked campaign spending can lead to a plutocracy, where wealth becomes the primary determinant of political success. By implementing sensible caps, we can mitigate the risk of corruption and ensure that elections are contests of ideas rather than financial might. However, these limits should be carefully calibrated to allow for effective campaigning while preventing excessive influence from moneyed interests.
In conclusion, the debate over campaign finance regulation is complex, with valid arguments on both sides. Nonetheless, I believe that well-designed spending limits are crucial for maintaining a healthy democracy that truly represents the will of the people rather than the wealth of a few.
Sample Essay 2 (Band 6-7)
The topic of how much money political parties can spend on their campaigns is a big issue in many countries. Some people think there should be limits, while others believe parties should be free to spend as much as they want. This essay will discuss both views and give my opinion.
Those who support limits on campaign spending say it’s important for fairness. They think that if there are no limits, rich people or big companies can have too much power in elections. This might mean that the candidate with the most money wins, not the one with the best ideas. Also, they believe that limits can make politicians focus more on talking to regular people instead of just spending money on TV ads.
On the other hand, people against spending limits say it’s about freedom of speech. They believe that political parties should be able to spend their money how they want to share their ideas with voters. They also think that limits might make it harder for new politicians to become well-known because they can’t spend as much money to get their name out there.
In my opinion, I think having some limits on campaign spending is a good idea. Too much money in politics can lead to corruption and make elections unfair. However, I also think the limits should not be too strict. Parties still need to be able to tell people about their ideas. Maybe a good solution would be to have a reasonable limit that allows for effective campaigning but prevents excessive spending.
To conclude, while there are good points on both sides of this argument, I believe that some limits on campaign spending are necessary to keep elections fair and focused on ideas rather than money.
Sample Essay 3 (Band 5-6)
Nowadays, there is a big discussion about how much money political parties can use for their campaigns. Some people think there should be limits, but others say parties should spend as much as they want. I will talk about both ideas and give my opinion.
People who want limits say it’s fair. They think if there are no limits, rich people can control elections. This means the person with the most money might win, not the best leader. Also, they say limits make politicians talk more to normal people instead of just making expensive TV ads.
But people against limits say it’s about free speech. They think parties should use their money how they want to tell people about their ideas. They also say limits might make it hard for new politicians because they can’t spend a lot to become famous.
I think having some limits is good. Too much money in politics can be bad and make elections unfair. But I also think the limits should not be too strict. Parties need to tell people about their ideas. Maybe we can have a limit that lets parties campaign well but stops them from spending too much.
In conclusion, I believe some limits on campaign spending are good to keep elections fair and about ideas, not just money.
Illustration of political campaign funding sources
Explanation of Band Scores
Band 8-9 Essay:
- Task Response: Fully addresses all parts of the task with a well-developed response. Presents a clear position throughout the essay.
- Coherence and Cohesion: Ideas are logically organized with clear progression. Uses a range of cohesive devices effectively.
- Lexical Resource: Uses a wide range of vocabulary with very natural and sophisticated control of lexical features.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Uses a wide range of structures with full flexibility and accuracy.
Band 6-7 Essay:
- Task Response: Addresses all parts of the task, though some parts may be more fully covered than others.
- Coherence and Cohesion: Information and ideas are generally arranged coherently, and there is a clear overall progression.
- Lexical Resource: Uses an adequate range of vocabulary for the task. There may be some errors in word choice but these do not impede communication.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms. There are some errors, but these rarely reduce communication.
Band 5-6 Essay:
- Task Response: Addresses the task only partially. The format may be inappropriate in places.
- Coherence and Cohesion: Presents information with some organization but there may be a lack of overall progression.
- Lexical Resource: Uses a limited range of vocabulary, but this is minimally adequate for the task.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Uses only a limited range of structures. Errors may frequently prevent meaning from coming through.
Key Vocabulary to Remember
Campaign finance (noun) – /kæmˈpeɪn faɪˈnæns/ – The raising and spending of money for political campaigns.
Spending cap (noun) – /ˈspendɪŋ kæp/ – A limit imposed on the amount of money that can be spent.
Plutocracy (noun) – /pluːˈtɒkrəsi/ – A society or system ruled and dominated by the wealthy.
Grassroots engagement (noun phrase) – /ˈɡrɑːsruːts ɪnˈɡeɪdʒmənt/ – Political activities or initiatives that originate from ordinary people.
Incumbent (noun/adjective) – /ɪnˈkʌmbənt/ – The current holder of a political office.
Mitigate (verb) – /ˈmɪtɪɡeɪt/ – To make less severe, serious, or painful.
Calibrate (verb) – /ˈkælɪbreɪt/ – To adjust precisely for a particular function.
Undue influence (noun phrase) – /ʌnˈdjuː ˈɪnfluəns/ – Excessive or inappropriate pressure exerted on someone.
Level the playing field (idiom) – /ˈlevl ðə ˈpleɪɪŋ fiːld/ – To create a situation that is fair for everyone.
Safeguard (verb) – /ˈseɪfɡɑːd/ – To protect something from harm or damage.
IELTS Writing Task 2 vocabulary flashcards
In conclusion, the topic of political campaign spending caps is a complex and relevant issue for IELTS Writing Task 2. To prepare for similar questions, practice writing essays on related topics such as:
- The influence of money in politics
- The role of media in political campaigns
- Public funding for political parties
- Transparency in campaign donations
Remember to always analyze the question carefully, plan your essay structure, and use a range of vocabulary and grammatical structures appropriate to your target band score. Feel free to practice writing an essay on this topic and share it in the comments section for feedback and discussion with other learners.