Case Study : Public Participation And Mccutcheon

1341 WordsDec 8, 20176 Pages
Public Participation and McCutcheon The main idea of this paper is to establish an assimilation of the McCutcheon case. The first goal is to review and summarize the history of the McCutcheon case. The second purpose will be, summing up the majority and minority point of views of this case. This suggests explaining why the chosen argument shows logical and legitimate influence. The third aim focuses on discussing whether the McCutcheon decision improves or demotivates the ability of the public to be engaged purposely in the analysis stage of public policy, in addition to defending the potential rationale. The ultimate goal of this essay will lead to substantive information through using academic resources, peer-reviewed journals, and current periodicals to reinforce the outcomes of the proposal. History of McCutcheon v. FEC The background of the McCutcheon v. FEC case dates back to 1971 when the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1971 was implemented. This Act replaced prior federal campaign finance laws and required campaign committees to disclose funding that was contributed and spent (Nelson, Adams, Groat, Kempema, & Vaughn, n.d.). This act was later amended in 1974 imposing limits on how much any single campaign could receive or spend on their mission. These limits were implemented due to the violations revealed in the Watergate scandal. The 1974 amendment also enacted the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The FEC was recognized; “…as an independent agency to assume the administrative functions previously divided between congressional officers and the General Accounting Office” (Nelson, et. al, n.d., para. 2). Just two years later, in 1976, there was a Supreme Court ruling which stated that establishing set limits on campaign spending was unconstitutional (n.d.). It was in the 1990’s that campaigners were establishing alternate methods of funding, to bypass the Federal Election Campaign Act. Moreover, the loopholes were primarily through media advocacy for urgency in voting for a specific candidate and did not directly violation the FECA regulation. In 2002, Congress passed a reform act called the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) (n.d.). Consequently, the BCRA law was also recognized as the
Open Document