Soft Money

604 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Political corruption in the united states

Soft Money

"Whether the issue is consumer privacy, a Patients' Bill of Rights, environmental pollution, or a prescription drug benefit for older Americans, soft money donors will get their opinions heard on Capitol Hill and at the White House. Soft money is drowning out the voices of average Americans -- it is time to put an end to the corrupt soft money system"

Common Cause President Scott Harshbarger

At the basis of the campaign finance reform movement is the belief that everyone should have an equal say in the government, and that wealthy individuals or special interest groups should not be able to manipulate the system through excessive contributions to unduly influence elections. The more expensive it becomes to finance a campaign, the more important the money becomes, and subsequently the less involved the candidate becomes in listening to the "voices of the average Americans." The Federal Election Commission, established in 1974, was the first independent institution created to monitor and enforce the campaign finance reforms that were designed to limit [individual or corporate] contributions that would disproportionately influence a federal election. The Commission also tries to ensure that the campaign finance information is accessible to the public, because "disclosure…is the single greatest check on the excesses of campaign finance," (Sabato).

Soft money, by definition, are the 'non federal' funds which are raised, and spent, outside of Federal Election Campaign Act's borders. Campaign finance reform evolved in order to restrict and regulate the campaign funds, but the soft money loophole allows committees to establish a separate bank account for 'nonfederal' activities, which is not monitored by FECA...

... middle of paper ...

...cording to the Common Cause glossary, "Soft money is money that is illegal under federal law -- it either violates federal source restrictions (such as money from corporations) or federal limits (such as large contributions from individuals in amounts often exceeding $100,000).

Soft money undoubtedly influences our government. National party committees are allowed to use the soft money funds for voter registration drives and get-out-the-vote campaigns, but these ads can easily be manipulated to influence presidential elections. Common Cause charges that "soft money contributions are laundered through the political parties in a way that allows federally illegal money to nonetheless be used to influence federal elections." While corporations make large [soft money] donations to political parties, they are also lobbying for various legislation issues before Congress.

Show More
Related

  • Citizens United v. FEC: United We Stand, Corporations and All

    1052 Words  | 3 Pages

    In January of 2010, the United States Supreme Court, in the spirit of free speech absolutism, issued its landmark Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, marking a radical shift in campaign finance law. This ruling—or what some rightfully deem a display of judicial activism on the part of the Roberts Court and what President Obama warned would “open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in…elections” —effectively and surreptitiously overturned Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and portions of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, struck down the corporate spending limits imposed by Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, and extended free speech rights to corporations. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief historical overview of campaign finance law in the United States, outline the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, and to examine the post-Citizens United political landscape.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Money By Dana Gioia

    438 Words  | 1 Pages

    money.In the line “To be made of it !” Gioia uses a hyperbole by referring to rich people as being

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Watergate

    555 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Federal Election Campaign Act, despite being backed by 75 percent of House Republicans, and 41 percent of Senate Republicans, caused immense controversy in Washington. Senator James Buckley sued the secretary of the senate Frances Valeo on the Constitutionality of FECA. In the end, the court upheld the law's contribution limits, presidential public financing program, and disclosure provisions. But they removed limits on spending, including independent expenditures, which is money spent by individuals or outside groups independent of campaigns. This shaped most major campaign financing rulings, including Citizen’s United.

    Read More

  • Soft Moneys Elimination From Governmental Campaigns

    1411 Words  | 3 Pages

    The current use of soft money in the US Governmental elections is phenomenal. The majority of candidates funding comes from soft money donations. Congress has attempted to close these funding loop holes; however they have had little success. Soft money violates standards set by congress by utilizing the loop hole found in the Federal Election Commission’s laws of Federal Campaigns. This practice of campaign funding should be eliminated from all governmental elections.

    Read More

  • Lee Hamilton's Public Criticisms Of Congress Still Doing Their Job?

    1323 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hamilton provides an inside look at how congress really works and clears up popular misconception that make members of congress look like wasteful bickering crooks that support gridlock and are only concerned with the needs of interest groups and lobbyists. Hamilton argues that Congress has changed for the better throughout the years and that they are held at higher standards than they were before. Hamilton states that Congress is not only working at keeping the public happy but that have recently become faced with a lot more issues than before, they are not only more issues but more complicated and technical that are very high risk policies that take a long time to produce a decision (Hamilton, 1988, 65). Hamilton states that Congress is a system in which the viewpoints of everyone are taken into account and make sure there is a consensus when it comes to defining decisions. Even though many of us acknowledge that lobbyist and special interest groups play an essential role in the law making party, Congress is making an effort to make sure that everyone’s voice is heard. Congress is making sure that the balance of power is distributed properly. In recent years, there has been a decline in mega-lobbies and interest groups so that not only the wealthy powerful get their voice heard, but the everyday american people get an opinion in things that affect them as well. In Gary Lee’s article, The NRA Has Lost some Firepower, we can see that interest groups are beginning to have less of an influence on larger political decisions (Hamilton, 1988, 65). For example, the National Rifle Association’s defeat in the battle over the “Brady bill” and their war towards trying to revamp Medicaid was a great loss for lobbyists and

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Super Pacs

    822 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Supreme Court of the United States articulated this point in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, commonly referred to as plain “Citizens United”, in the majority opinion. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, in his majority opinion, wrote that “If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech,” (Kennedy). Basically, he is saying that if free speech means anything, it must apply to the case of campaign contributions. Where Citizens United failed, however, was its cap on independent expenditures that corporations could make. It let corporations influence elections but limited money spent. SpeechNow.org v. FEC solved that issue. It ruled against the cap of donations on Super PACs (Forget Citizens United). In conjunction with the Citizens United decision, Super PACs were finally able to use their free speech. This paved a path for free speech in the election

    Read More

  • The Privileged Position of Business

    548 Words  | 2 Pages

    in lobbying policy makers, the role of business in financing elections, and messages favorable to

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On Campaign Finance

    353 Words  | 1 Pages

    Campaign finance refers to all funds raised to help increase candidates, political parties, or policy attempts and public votes. When it comes to political parties, generous organizations, and political action groups in the United States are used to collect money toward keep campaigns alive. Campaign finance always has problems when it comes to these involvements. These involvements include donating to candidate, parties and other political organization. Matthew J. Streb stated “instead of placing further restrictions on campaign donations to candidates, parties, and other political organizations, we should consider eliminating contribution restrictions entirely (Rethinking American Electoral Democracy)”. In other words, instead of allowing

    Read More

  • Campaign Finance Reform

    2679 Words  | 6 Pages

    Campaign finance reform has a broad history in America. In particular, campaign finance has developed extensively in the past forty years, as the courts have attempted to create federal elections that best sustain the ideals of a representative democracy. In the most recent Supreme Court decision concerning campaign finance, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court essentially decided to treat corporations like individuals by allowing corporations to spend money on federal elections through unlimited independent expenditures. In order to understand how the Supreme Court justified this decision, however, the history of campaign finance in regards to individuals must be examined. At the crux of these campaign finance laws is the balancing of two democratic ideals: the ability of individuals to exercise their right to free speech, and the avoidance of corrupt practices by contributors and candidates. An examination of these ideals, as well as the effectiveness of the current campaign finance system in upholding these ideas, will provide a basic framework for the decision of Citizens United v. FEC.

    Read More

  • Bipartisanship

    950 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hypothesis #2:     Money, big corporations, and fellow party affiliates affect the voting patterns of Senators and House members.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Kenneth Vogel's Big Money

    1391 Words  | 3 Pages

    Along with Obama, Vogel mentions Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid as critics of large donors, who then also were leading in super PAC fundraisers. Though Vogel mentions many people and events, he never goes into great detail about any of it. Even with the immense amount of information that is left to the reader to decipher and research, one must ask themselves this question, “what are the effects of big money on modern politics.”

    Read More

  • Iron Triangle Interest Groups

    889 Words  | 2 Pages

    Many people argue that the legislative branch is run by few big interest groups because of their massive contributions against very small contributions from individuals. In a democratic society, power must be shared equally among its citizens, but is that the case in the United States? The answer is simply no, and by limiting their overall spending on elections, policymakers will listen and pay more attention to the public interest over the special interest. Also, by revealing the freeloaders’ names, people will have more knowledge of who is representing them and who has tended to benefit those who made contributions to their campaigns. Finally, prohibiting the spending on food, entertainment and gifts to legislative branch employee will also reduce the corruption in the legislative

    Read More

  • Interest Groups and Political Parties

    1676 Words  | 4 Pages

    The advocacy explosion is strongly linked to the decline of the American political party and the role of the political parties in elections. As interest groups have gained more power and had a larger control over politics and political goods the power that is exerted by political parties has dwindled. The power of the interest group has grown larger with the amount of members and the financial rewards that have come with the new members. In elections interest groups do not usually participate directly with the candidate or the election. Berry points out that “Groups often try to leverage their endorsement to obtain support for one of their priorities” (Berry, 53). With interest groups spreading their resources around the actual election can be affected very minimally by the many interest groups that contribute money to the election. However, the candidates who obtain political office through the help of special interest money still owe some sort of loyalty to the interest group regardless of which party wins the election. This loyalty and the promise of more money in the future gives the elected of...

    Read More

  • Should Campaign Funding be Limited?

    1249 Words  | 3 Pages

    The issue of campaign financing has been discussed for a long time. Running for office especially a higher office is not a cheap event. Candidates must spend much for hiring staff, renting office space, buying ads etc. Where does the money come from? It cannot officially come from corporations or national banks because that has been forbidden since 1907 by Congress. So if the candidate is not extremely rich himself the funding must come from donations from individuals, party committees, and PACs. PACs are political action committees, which raise funds from different sources and can be set up by corporations, labor unions or other organizations. In 1974, the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) requires full disclosure of any federal campaign contributions and expenditures and limits contributions to all federal candidates and political committees influencing federal elections. In 1976 the case Buckley v. Valeo upheld the contribution limits as a measure against bribery. But the Court did not rule against limits on independent expenditures, support which is not coordinated with the candidate. In the newest development, the McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission ruling from April 2014 the supreme court struck down the aggregate limits on the amount an individual may contribute during a two-year period to all federal candidates, parties and political action committees combined. Striking down the restrictions on campaign funding creates a shift in influence and power in politics and therefore endangers democracy. Unlimited campaign funding increases the influence of few rich people on election and politics. On the other side it diminishes the influence of the majority, ordinary (poor) people, the people.

    Read More

  • Corruption in the Pharmaceutical Industry

    1449 Words  | 3 Pages

    "OpenSecrets." OpenSecrets.org: Money in Politics -- See Who's Giving & Who's Getting. Web. 23 June 2010. .

    Read More

More about Soft Money

Open Document