I’ve loved politics since I was in 6th grade, I didn’t always have the best understanding of it all when I was younger but I was able to recognize that there were a lot of citizens who were disgruntled with their government’s progress. For example, as of August 2014, congresses’ approval rating is only 14% (Riffkin, 2014). As I’ve aged I realized that the recent Supreme Court decisions regarding corporate money and personal spending limits have made the government a less effective tool for the American citizens and that is why I’ve chosen to write on the influence of money in politics. I believe this is the most important political issue that we currently face because we are unable to pass the bills that reflect the views of the American people …show more content…
Their mission is to “reverse Citizens United, Restore our Democracy, and Save the Republic” by “passing a much needed Free and Fair Elections Amendment to our Constitution.” (Uygur, n.d.) They want to end corporate personhood and return to public financing of elections. The way Wolf PAC plans to achieve this is goal is to excite the citizens across the nation to have a larger amount of people involved and passionate about this issue. Once there are enough Wolf PAC members to be spread throughout the country, the next step would to be having the members of Wolf PAC call their local state legislatures to discuss the influence of money in politics with them. Once a state is receptive enough of the PAC’s mission, they plant to work with state legislatures to call for a convention to propose an amendment to the United States Constitution, which is a 5th amendment right (Uygur, n.d.). This may seem like a difficult mission but so far New Jersey, Vermont, Illinois, and California have already passed the resolution that calls for the convention. New Hampshire, Delaware, Maryland, Missouri, Hawaii, and Connecticut all currently have pending bills relating to money in politics that are a result of Wolf PAC’s effort (The Young Turks, 2015). According to the 5th amendment, there needs to be at least 34 state legislatures to call for a convention regarding the same issue. Once they gather at the convention, they need to create an official amendment. That amendment would need to be ratified by 38 states to become part of the constitution. So far Wolf PAC is working with 10 states and they only need 38. They started this mission four years and one month ago, so imagine what they can do with more
Double edge sword is what lies at the heart of Roach’s issue with the American political system. While the public’s trust for their elected officials continues to disintegrate because of backroom deals and a poor transparency, it is exactly what the American political system requires its participants to do in order to be effective deal makers and according Roach, “Campaign contributions and smoke-filled rooms, pork is a tool of democratic governance, not violation of it. It can be used for corrupt purposes but also, for vital ones.” Roach argues that the public must take the good with the bad, they do not have to like it or agree with it, but they must see the importance that each side plays. Roach believes that it has been within the past 40 years that publics growing mistrust for the American political system has pushed toward favoring disintermediation, populism, and self-expression over professionals and political insiders.
This may be true; however, I seem, too often, to see another side of this organization. In recent months and years, their agendas have been advanced only through the media and political outcries, not through the democratic process as they have stated. Maybe they employ the lesser known, but effective, democrat process.
Interest groups, lobbyists, large corporations, and PACs try to influence the congressional committees' bills so they can have a say in the legislative process. When an interest group hears about a bill that is being debated on in a committee, they try to influence a members vote and they try to get a part of the bill changed. For example, a lobbyist came to me on a bill I proposed on making health care plans have no minimum requirement on benefits the company gives to its patients. He told me about how he did not get the right treatments and tests done on diseases he has and now is suffering badly from them. It was because the health plan did not have to give him anything extra. He changed my mind on the bill, and I changed the bill to setting a minimum standard on benefits given to patients.
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.
Political machines were supported by continuing immigration, sustained by patronage, enlarged by wealth, and in the end were weeded out by reformers progress for public rather than private good, and caused by the need for public works and skilled workers, after the population of cities expanded.
During the November 2000 presidential elections, two children tried to make daddy proud. First there was Albert Gore Jr. – the son of a powerful and respected senator of Tennessee – who was no stranger to politics and privilege. As a child he attended the prestigious St. Alban’s School and while growing up, it was common to see then Vice President Richard Nixon as a guest at the family dinner table. Then there was George W. Bush – a third-generation politician, with his grandfather a former senator, his brother the governor of Florida, and his father being former president. The November 2000 presidential elections would become the battle of dynastic supremacy. Whose silver spoon was shiniest? In the end, Bush’s spoon was voted most polished (at least by the electoral standards, certainly not by the popular) and was given the presidential seat. The election had many Americans frustrated, echoing columnist Lars-Erik Nelson’s protest, “Bush’s spectacular career rebuts the notion that America has become a meritocracy, in which we are all born equal and then judged upon our intelligence, talent, creativity, and aggressiveness” (qtd. in Maass 10).
Reformation on the funding of political campaigns has been an ongoing battle between trying to create an equal and democratic balance of representation for the people and the rich and powerful who have succeeded in using the media to control those people. With The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1972 and the establishment of the Federal Election Commission in 1975, steps were taken to hold the wealthy and public officials accountable for corruption and to try and prevent it. Though the act could be viewed as a positive sign of peaceful evolution in the direction o...
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.”
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
Essentially, interest groups use many different tactics to accomplish their central goals but this paper will detail 2 of them. The first being lobbying, which is the act of persuading businesses as well as government leaders to help a specific organization by changing laws or creating events in favor of that group. Interest groups use this technique by hiring someone to represent them and advocate their cause to on the behalf of the entire group. These hired representatives usually have more than enough experience within the political field and are able to persuade connections within the government for help with their concerns. This method gets a lot of criticism because although lobbyist offer their input to government officials on pending laws, they only look at what is favorable for their cause. When trying to make a difference you have to not only reflect on your argument but on the side affects of that argument as
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...
These pluralistic interest groups are free to operate and lobby in the political arena, fighting against the majority and other competing factions for voice in Congress. With the influence of multiple factions operating throughout the political system, a balance of power is created (Kernell 2000, 429). This is much like the international theory of sovereign states balancing each other’s power to create a political system that focuses on stability, yet is always in a constant flux of power. With this in mind, special interest groups are constantly contending for power by raising money, campaigning, and lobbying in Congress. When a special interest group is threatened by a competing policy, the group will organize efforts to balance, or transcend the power of the competing group.
As we approach the 2004 presidential election everyone is getting in line to throw their money into the Proverbial feeding trough that all politicians take from. Campaigns are made and broke depending on how much money they have to spend. Fundraising is one way for politicians to receive contributions from your typical everyday blue collar citizen, but where do the four and five figure contributions come from? They come from intrest groups and lobbyists. These are the people, companies, and organizations that control our government whether they admit it or not. Campaign are run by this money and their agendas are the ones that congress on both the state and national level. The best way to sum up how all this works is "You’re one of 435 ants in the House, and unless you’re on the right committee a lot of these people don’t even return your phone calls."
The American Political System The American political system is a federal system, which consists of
is usually a very wealthy man. Wealth paves the road to a good education. If