The 2008 race for the White House is already the costliest campaign in history

The Democrats are out gunning the Republicans in total campaign fundraising efforts. The Democrats are using rule-bending but innovative methods to raise funds from their supporters, while the Republicans are still relying on their narrowing list of established corporate sponsorships.

Obama leads outright when it comes to donations via the Internet, having raised a record breaking total of $32.5 million from both online and traditional sources in the Q2 of 2007. However, Hillary's $27 million would probably be eclipsed in Q3 as Bill Clinton is planning to raise more funds for her campaign from Ireland, where Obama and the others probably can't go just right now.

A look at the trends shows that the $2,300 maximum donation per individual is so unrealistic that companies, which are statutorily banned from making political donations, are arranging the packaging of donations on behalf of their employees. This is generally true for both parties.

The current political debate is how to remove the influence of donors from American policy making:

[....Mary Boyle, communications director for Common Cause, a good-government reform group, explains how "bundlers" have become the new political power brokers.

"When you have the head of an oil company who's helping raise $200,000 for you, it's likely that person is going to have some access and influence to you that other members of the public don't get - and that's where you see the influence in policy," she says.

Common Cause is one of many groups campaigning to make all US elections publicly funded to end dependency on private contributions.

Candidates already have the option to accept public funding but many choose not to do so because they don't think it gives them enough money.

It is currently capped at about $20m - far less than the $27m raised by Hillary Clinton, for example, in the second quarter of this year......

"This campaign should be about ideas and personalities and leadership, but at this point it's just a struggle to raise money," she says.

"A number of reforms have to be made and we're hoping that it happens by 2012, the next presidential election. It's too late for anything for next year."....

But the winning candidate is not necessarily the one who starts out with the most money - although by the end of the race they will probably be the best funded.

"There have been a lot of candidates with relatively small amounts of cash who do pretty well in the nomination process," says Mr Wilcox.

"If the candidate has no money, they can't get the message out. But if they have enough money to be heard then they can attract both votes and donors."

Americans have become increasingly cynical about the power of money in politics. But they are also more likely to make a financial contribution themselves when they are most dissatisfied.

That could help explain the rapidly growing number of small donors - one of the biggest trends of this presidential election.

With approval ratings for President George W Bush and Congress at an all-time low, many voters may be already expressing their views by writing a cheque.]