Argumentative Essay On Political Reform

From the very first elections held in the United States, there has always been a strong link between money and politics. During the first elections in the late 1700’s you had to be a white male landowner over the age of 21 in order to vote, meaning that you had to have money in order to have your vote counted. It seems today that we cannot go a day with out seeing campaign finance in the media, whether or not it is through advertisements for politicians in the media or asked to donate money to help let your favorite candidate win. Because campaign finance has always been on the back burner of political issues, there has hardly been any change to the large influence money has over the election process and politicians. While money has it’s

Americans only see few ways to affect real change on government because politicians are too reliant upon large donations. Groups contribute money, and later on receive a kickback of bill that favors them or supports their positions. “Candidates who raise lots of money say it indicates broad support. Candidates with little money point out that voters, not donors, decide elections” (2012 Presidential). Candidates spend large amount of time fundraising, which decreases people’s confidence in the government’s ability to do their

Third party votes have always been a controversial topic. Some say that third party votes should continue to be counted in presidential ballots while others believe that third party votes should not count on the ballots. I agree with the statement that a citizen be wasting their vote by voting for the third party candidate.

Regulating soft money has been difficult because of constitutional issues that protect First Amendment rights, and Congress’ rights over regulating political parties must be focused on preventing fraud or corruption (Mason, 1997). Soft money is used to mobilize campaigns by using the money to support voter registration drives, and other similar activities designed to jump start a candidates’ campaign (Brennan Center, 2000). For this reason, soft money is important to an election campaign, and recently the amount of soft money raised for campaigns has skyrocketed. It has become a concern because it is largely unregulated and can be used to gain an unfair

Elissa Nunez of NBC News reports that 64% of Americans believe that the big money in politics discourages many great candidates from running (Nunez). On top of this number, 76% of people believe that "money has a greater influence on politics and elected officials today than in the past," (Nunez). These numbers lead to a fundamental issue in our government; a huge distrust in our federal government. Only a month after 9/11, 60% of citizens said they could trust the federal government, however, following the Iraq war and an economic downturn the number dropped to a mere 24% in 2007

‘Despite several attempts to regulate campaign finance, money increasingly dominates the U.S. Electoral process and is the main factor contributing to a candidates success’ Discuss (30 marks)

Of course, such influence establishes a tyranny of the rich that our forefathers clearly wanted to prevent. Senator Russ Feingold, a proponent of campaign finance reform, said, "The current campaign finance system is fueling the transformation of our representative democracy into a corporate democracy creating a political system that allots power in direct relation to the amount of money an individual or interest group can contribute" (Campaign Finance Reform). The horror of such a governmental system has fueled the cries for campaign finance reform.

Monetary value has had significant influence in determining the outcome of elections. The input and strategies put forward by different forces determine the organizational scheme and the ability to grab most of the seats. Although money has been linked to corrupt deals in many countries, with leaders amassing power through corrupt and underhand methods, especially in Africa, this is not the case of the same monetary influence witnessed in America. The conventions of the U.S.A raise a lot of money in preparation for campaigns and elections to constitute a good number of representatives. The paper, therefore, looks at the effect of money in the recently concluded elections of the Congress, giving a deeper view of the 113th and 114th Congress election of the two major conventions.

With the introduction of “soft” money in politics, elections no longer go to the best candidate, but simply to the richer one. Soft money is defined as unregulated money that is given to the political parties that ends up being used by candidates in an election. In last year’s elections, the Republican and Democratic parties raised more than one-half of a billion dollars in soft money. Current politicians are pushing the envelope farther than any previous administrations when it comes to finding loopholes in the legal system for campaign fundraising. The legal limit that any one person can contribute to a given candidate or campaign is one thousand dollars. There is, however, no limit on the amount of money one

Scandals, profiteering, and corruption are nothing new when it comes to politics. Plunkitt of Tammany Hall and his political machines we're masters of such chicanery. The infamous Tammany Hall political machines dominated mid 19th century through 20th century politics in New York City. He explained in “Reciprocity in Patronage”, “what he says is, that you can’t keep an organization together without patronage. Men ain’t in politics for nothin’. They want something out of it” (47). Plunkitt was stern on patriotism, it came hand in hand with loyalty in his eyes. He got people to vote for who he wanted by making them see him as their savior. He accomplished that by placing people who were homeless with

     Upon entering my first semester at Southern Nazarene University I could not have told you my political ideology. I knew what my opinions, observations, expectations, and ideals were, but did not know the proper ideology that would define them. Through several courses that I have taken, I have become more informed as to the role that I would like to see the government take throughout society as a whole and in the economy. Upon reading the section of ideology in American Government and Politics Today: the Essentials I learned that the correct term for my ideology is right-wing Conservatism. I would like to see the government take action if necessary in the economy, yet let

Public Citizen is a non-profit and consumer rights advocacy group. Their mission is to ensure that all citizens are represented in the levels of government power. Since 1971, the organization has have successfully challenged the abusive practices of the pharmaceutical, nuclear and automobile industries. Public Citizen has five policy groups: Congress Watch division, the Energy Program, Global Trade Watch, the Health Research Group and our Litigation Group. According to the Public Citizen website, the organization does not participate in partisan political activities or endorse any candidates for elected office. Public Citizen does not accept government or corporate money and they solely rely on foundation grants, publication sales and assistance

The idea of money in politics has always been a polarizing issue. For over one hundred years the discussion of individuals and corporations financing campaigns has led to a debate of corruption versus free speech. Is money in politics a corrupting influence that always leads to quid pro quo? Or, is it an issue of allowing individuals to use their money as an extension of their freedom of speech? Recently, campaign finance reform has been a very dynamic issue. With the last major supreme court case Citizens United v. FEC, money in politics has taken a significant turn from the status quo. With only seven years after the Citizens United ruling we can already see the effects of less regulated free speech in politics.

”Painting, writing, orchestra, band, choir these programs are the so-called money wasting according to the government. Some governments believe that if they take these programs away their budget will be more. They said they have done tests and evidence that shows how it does effect of course there is statistics and finances that show that. However, you cannot really base something we are born with based on a test. The Arts is a compelling thing some people are born with it some are not. It would not be fair to the kids who struggle in the core subjects like math and reading the kids who do not well let me tell you, you are lucky. Those kids are confident in the math and reading the kids who are not they feel ashamed of themselves that they cannot get a certain concept.

Since part of the money is being used to buy off politicians, it is corrupting our political system on all levels,