What debate topic are the following sentences about?

1. However , when this hypothesis was scientifically tested , it turned out that in fact successful and popular candidates merely attracted more money , the same way they attract more volunteers , more endorsers , and more votes .
2. Therefore , money , like an endorsement , is just a demonstrative way of throwing ones weight behind a candidate one agrees with .
3. Money is actually a very effective way of gauging the success of the ideas presented to the electorate , it shows the best political ideas and personalities in the through the market .
4. It is often argued that politicians who spend a lot of money win elections .
5. The Journal of Political Economy , Volume 102 , Issue 4 , August 1994 , pp. 777-798 .
6. Viewed in this context , money is not some sinister device for unpopular ideas to rise to the top against the will of the majority , but , like an endorsement , a form of speech supporting those ideas which are already popular enough to attract it .
7. Steven D. Levitt Using Repeat Challengers to Estimate the effect of Campaign Spending on Election Outcomes to the U.S. House .
This House believes the expenditure of money should be protected as speech.
Vilket debattämne handlar följande meningar om? 1. Men, när denna hypotes var vetenskapligt testad, visade det sig att i själva verket framgångsrika och populära kandidater bara lockade mer pengar, på samma sätt som de lockar fler volontärer, fler anhängare, och fler röster. 2. Därför, pengar, som en påskrift, är bara ett demonstrativt sätt att kasta sina vikt bakom en kandidat man håller med. 3. Pengar är faktiskt ett mycket effektivt sätt att mäta framgången för de idéer som presenteras för väljarna, det visar de bästa politiska idéer och personligheter på marknaden. 4. Det hävdas ofta att politiker som spenderar mycket pengar vinner val. 5. Tidskriften för politisk ekonomi, band 102, nummer 4, augusti 1994, s. 777-798. 6. Sedd i detta sammanhang, pengar är inte någon ondskefull anordning för impopulära idéer att stiga till toppen mot majoritetens vilja, men, som ett stöd, en form av tal som stöder de idéer som redan är populära nog att locka det. 7. Steven D. Levitt Använda Repeat Challengers för att uppskatta effekten av kampanj Utgifter för valresultat till USA: s hus.
What is the subject of the debate? 1. However, when this hypothesis was scientifically tested, it turned out that in fact successful and popular candidates only attracted more money, just as they attract more volunteers, more supporters, and more votes. 2. So, money, as a endorsement, is just a demonstrative way of throwing your weight behind a candidate you agree with. 3. Money is actually a very effective way of measuring the success of the ideas presented to voters, it shows the best political ideas and personalities in the market. 4. It is often claimed that politicians who spend a lot of money win elections. 5. Journal of Political Economy, Volume 102, Issue 4, August 1994, p. 777-798. 6. Seen in this context, money is not some sinister device for unpopular ideas to rise to the top against the will of the majority, but, as a support, a form of speech that supports those ideas that are already popular enough to attract it. 7. Steven D. Levitt Using Repeat Challengers to Appreciate the Effect of Campaign Expenditure on Election Results to the House of the United States.
Parlamentet anser att utgifterna för pengar bör skyddas som tal.
believes that spending on money should be protected as speech;