Campaign Funding

1931 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Easy on Corruption in politics

Campaign Funding

What We Don’t Know About Campaign Finance Does Hurt Us. “No matter what your social issue, if you want to solve it get the money out of politics. Only then will lawmakers vote for their people rather than their pocketbooks.” Jack E. Lohman. Money corrupts politics, and when contributions are being made to candidates it is not in the best interest of the American people. Campaign Finance is out of control in today’s political races. Candidates are taking money from wherever and whoever they can get it. Soft money is flowing through elections without care or caution. People who make these contributions do not share the views of the average citizen, so politicians end up representing the wrong people. Money decides races, sometimes leaving the better man but lighter spender out of a position. Candidates make decisions based on what will help them financially that what is better for the people. Contributions by industry are made not in the interest of the people, sometimes hurting them in ways they don’t even know. No matter what the opposition may say campaign finance reform is needed urgently to keep our democracy as our founders intended it. People and corporations that make the largest donations to campaigns do not share views with the general population. Politicians will listen to those who give them money so that they can depend on that money being there again when it is time for reelection. Yet individual donors making a $200 dollar or more contribution make up only .33% of the population. This extremely small percentage of mostly wealthy individuals gain the power to influence politicians to their liking. The idea that these people should have power to affect government more than those with less money goes against the concept of equality for all, which is what made this country great. People who make large donations do not share the same views on most issues as the general population. Robert L. Borosage and Ruy Teixeira report that while 53 percent of voters want stricter regulations on businesses and corporations, to give workers a fair salary and working conditions, 58 percent of campaign donors want to see less control over the businesses and corporations of America. Donors also want less government spending with lower taxes, while the majority of citizens want a larger, more powerful government. A very tiny part of our populat...

... middle of paper ...

...r. After cuts from corporate welfare and wasteful government spending this would save taxpayers 495 to 995 dollars a year, not to mention price drops as a result of reduced corporate spending on political campaigns. This would put more money in the hands of the taxpayer to buy more products helping the economy. Most important, politicians would not be swayed by monetary interest offered to them for help in other areas. Donors not representing the public, money, not people and issues deciding races, politicians voting for campaign funds instead of the public, corporations risking the safety of people, these are all problems that could be fixed by reforming campaign finance. Campaign finance is an urgent problem that must be remedied soon or we will be facing a situation in government where the power lies in the hand of those who have money to donate to campaigns. If something is not done we will be heading straight into a corrupt and contemptible government whose only care is that of being reelected. Action must be taken now before it is too late and scandalous congressmen will only support scandalous policy. If our government is to be saved, we must have campaign finance reform.

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

  • 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

  • The Economic Policies of President Eisenhower

    1903 Words  | 4 Pages

    While this would normally pose a problem to the federal budget, it will not due to current conditions. The amount of money formerly spent on national security, meaning military and defense spending has been severely reduced (Albertson, 139). This frees up a large amount of money to be used for other goals. These goals should be those of improving the standard of living for each and every American and not the immediate reduction of taxes, a goal which many members of the Republican party would like to see pursued. The programs initiated under the policies of the New Deal and Fair Deal should not simply be maintained, instead they should be expanded upon.

    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

  • Analysis Of The March Of Dimes Campaign

    1013 Words  | 3 Pages

    When people watch TV and a March of Dimes commercial comes on, how do they feel? Most people see the premature babies and it upsets them. They start feeling bad and begin to wonder what they could do to help, which is the goal of March of Dimes. March of Dimes has been fighting to save babies since 2003. They work everyday to find donations to fund life-saving research on what causes prematurity. Their commercials and advertisements are so strong because they need as many people to donate as possible. The March of Dimes campaign uses mostly pathos to advertise their charity and persuade people to join them.

    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

  • The McCain-Feingold Bill

    555 Words  | 2 Pages

    Is the campaign finance system an important issue or just another made up problem. Well,

    Read More

  • Campaign Finance Reform

    690 Words  | 2 Pages

    The subject of campaign finance reform sounds so dull, but it is necessary to understand that reform helps to keep the society flowing smoothly. Therefore, what is the current status of campaign finance reform? In 2002 the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act was passed by Congress. It was also known as the McCain-Feingold Act (Sidlow, 2013, p.213). It banned soft money at federal levels and regulated campaign ads from interest groups because the enormous amount of money spent by interest groups for their ads had the appearance of corruption (South University Online, 2013). There is so much money floating around right now that I fear the common man may soon have little say in what happens in this country. Now the super PACs and 501c's are spreading their influences too. Can reform be a realistic expectation of the American political process?

    Read More

  • The Funding Of Public Education

    1582 Words  | 4 Pages

    The funding of public education has long been an issue for the state government of Texas. Starting before Texas was even a state, public education funding was at the forefront of politicians’ minds. In 1836, one of the reasons Anglo-Texans wanted to become independent from Mexico was Mexico’s lack of a public school system (An Overview of the History of Public Education in Texas, 2016). This drove the desire of President Mirabeau B. Lamar of the Republic of Texas to create legislation that would grant public schools land (A Brief History of Public Education, n.d.). This act set aside four leagues of land per county for the use of free education centers and thus began the funding of public education by the state government (An Overview of the History of Public Education in Texas, 2016). In the last 177 years, the Texas Legislature and the Texas Education Agency have created numerous acts and laws regarding the funding of education, but it has been in the last 50 years that this topic has become highly contested, resulting in several lawsuits and endless efforts (by the school districts) to equalize the distribution of funds to Texas school districts (Texas School Finance History, n.d.). In sum, the complex issues and policies that surround the funding of public education are derived from a combination of the legislature, bureaucratic agencies, and local governments in the form of school districts.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Kenneth Vogel's Big Money

    1391 Words  | 3 Pages

    December of 2010, in a five to four vote, it was decided that corporate funding of independants in in elections was protected under the first Amendment. This opened the floodgate for the 2012 elections as the candidates took to many platforms to raise money for their campaigns. Mitt Romney along with the help of Spencer Zwick raised 6.5 million dollars simply through a call-a-thon. The secret weapon in this call-a-thon was a program called ComMITT. This program allowed the user to solicit donations from contacts in their email, and online social networking sites. Any donation made fed directly back into the campaign, giving a real-time tally of pledges. With all of this information, one can make a decision for or against campaign finance contributions. Personally, I have conflicting feelings about limitations on campaign finance. I feel as though there should not be a limit for campaign finance contributions, but there should be more qualifications for becoming president. I do not believe there should be a limit on campaign finance because technically it is covered under freedom of speech. It is covered under freedom of speech. This is because giving money is showing

    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

  • 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

  • School Funding

    3027 Words  | 7 Pages

    You’re a ninth grader at a school in Philadelphia. The neighborhood is poor, even if not all of the students are. Your school has very little money for things like computers or technology. You walk into second period one day, sit down, and discover that the floor next to your desk is damp. The teacher explains that there is a leak in the roof, and that the school can’t afford to fix it. The school can’t afford to fix the leak or buy computers because it is inadequately funded. So the government kindly lends your school the money to not only fix the leak, but buy computers. But does that necessarily motivate you to improve your grades? Do you suddenly decide to do your homework because the leak is fixed? Probably not. The government sees that your grades remained the same, and two years later, when our school needs to hire more teachers and make the classes smaller, the government denies the school that money. They say that since money didn’t help your grades last time, why should it help you now?

    Read More

  • Negative Political Advertisement

    1340 Words  | 3 Pages

    “Negative advertising gets the supporters committed and excited” (Bike 1). What Bike is trying to say is that negative advertisement gets people excited and wanting to look into that specific person. This essay is going to be about how negative advertisement should be allowed. People should have the right to pledge whatever they want to pledge in. “ A ban on negative political advertising would open the political world up to those who don’t want to be expose themselves to media bullies” (Admin 2). I believe that if people are scared to expose themselves then they must have something to hide. Even though negative things said about those candidates are not true, I believe that negative political advertisement should be allowed because negative advertisement makes people want to look more into that specific candidate and we are emotionally attached to negativity.

    Read More

  • Political Caucus

    443 Words  | 1 Pages

    1. Politicians participate in negative campaigning in order to turn off voters against the competing politicians. Negative campaigning works by putting out negative advertisements that deals with a politician’s personality, opinion, or record. With this intention, politicians especially participate in negative campaigning because it is more impactful than positive campaigning; voters are more easily turned off by negative comments rather than a politician's views because of party loyalty and other factors. On the other hand, negative campaigning can backlash on the politician depending on the portrayal of the advertisement and lack of effort on the politician’s own campaign.

    Read More

More about Campaign Funding

Open Document