Individual contributions are the primary source of party funding in the United States, accounting for over 60% of all funds raised.

The Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC overturned a ban on corporate contributions to parties, allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on independent expenditures.

Public financing of elections is supported by a variety of arguments, including that it would reduce the influence of money in politics, make elections more fair and competitive, and increase voter turnout.

Public financing of elections is opposed by a variety of arguments, including that it would be too expensive, give the government too much control over elections, and stifle free speech.

The future of party funding faces a number of challenges, including the rise of Super PACs, the increasing cost of campaigns, and the decline of traditional sources of funding.

A variety of potential solutions have been proposed to address the challenges facing the future of party funding, including public financing of elections, campaign finance reform, and increased transparency.

The future of party funding is likely to be a combination of all of the above, with a continued increase in the role of Super PACs, a decline in the role of traditional sources of funding, and a move towards public financing of elections.

The changing landscape of party funding has the potential to lead to a number of negative consequences, including increased polarization, decreased voter turnout, and a decline in the quality of democracy.

A variety of measures can be taken to mitigate the negative consequences of the changing landscape of party funding, including enacting campaign finance reform, increasing transparency, and educating voters about the importance of campaign finance reform.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is responsible for enforcing campaign finance laws, investigating violations of campaign finance laws, and providing guidance to candidates and political parties on campaign finance laws.

The FEC has been criticized for being too partisan, not effective in enforcing campaign finance laws, and too bureaucratic.

A variety of proposals have been made for reforming the FEC, including making it more bipartisan, giving it more resources, and streamlining its procedures.

The likelihood of FEC reform in the near future is not very high, given the partisan gridlock in Congress and the lack of public support for campaign finance reform.

A variety of alternative approaches to regulating party funding have been proposed, including public financing of elections, voucher systems, and small-donor matching programs.

Each of the alternative approaches to regulating party funding has its own advantages and disadvantages.