Money: The Controversy Of Money In Politics

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

“Corruption, improper and usually unlawful conduct intended to secure a benefit for oneself or another its forms include bribery, extortion, and the misuse of inside information. It exists where there is community indifference or a lack of enforcement policies.”(Encyclopedia Britannica). Today political Corruption in all forms exists in every country in the world. In some countries it is more prominent then in others, but no matter where you go it still occurs. Recently in mid 2013 some political corruption was brought to light in New York. “Since 2007, state senators have been more likely to be arrested then to lose their seats in a general election,” (New York Public Interest Research group). In April of 2013 New York State

In the article “Money: The Real Truth about Money” by Gregg Easterbrook published In Time Magazine (2005), the author compares two different generation’s attitudes towards money, and how it affects their happiness. The author’s standing qualifies him to write and appeal this issue, he’s a contributing editor of The Atlantic and The Washington Monthly, and he also writes the Tuesday Morning Quarterback column for ESPN.com. Easterbrook’s primary audience appears to be middle class Americans however he draws a wider secondary audience’s attention. The author succeeded in convincing his readers through his rhetorical appeals, credible sources and his clever use of language.

Does money control today's society? The Younger family is an African American family in Chicago in the 1950s. The family lives in a small and ratty one window apartment. They are an “average” family who receives the proceeds from a $10,000 life insurance policy from the death of Walter Lee Sr. Everyone in the family has their own idea of what they want to do with the money, if it was up to one of them. The author's story setting is in the apartment surrounded by various conflicts, conversations and actions of the characters. The story line is only a couple of days, but in that time the author is able to show how poverty can have a negative effect on the Younger family.

The right of free speech granted to all citizens in the first amendment, the necessity of funding expensive political campaigns, and the fact that small donations make a candidate responsive to the needs of their constituents, all make any restrictions on campaign financing unneeded and onerous. Congress should strike down any bills attempting to reform this essential part of the U.S. election process. Any further restrictions on donations to political campaigns will prove detrimental to the United States functioning system of elections by limiting individuals’ freedom of speech, making our candidate’s campaigns underfunded and unresponsive to the needs of the American people.

A further argument that compliments the idea that money increasingly dominates the US electoral process and is the main factor in contributing to a candidate’s success is Congress’ attempts to try and limit its influence. The Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act 2002 set limits on campaign finance but was effectively struck down in Citizens United 2010. Congress isn’t trying to set limits on the amount of events a candidate runs but rather the expenditure limits. This suggests that money increasingly dominates the US electoral process and is the main factor in contributing to a candidate’s success because Congress trying to limit indicates its influence and dominance. In the UK, there is a strict campaign finance rule, which also compliments the idea that it is a dominant factor.

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.

“All contributions by corporations to any political committee or for any political purpose should be forbidden by law” This quote from Theodore Roosevelt illustrates how corporate money can be disastrous when involved in election cycles. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The Supreme Court decided in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that companies and Super PAC’s could donate unlimited amount of money to support candidates. The Citizens United ruling has caused increased political corruption in the United States by giving candidates the money they need to win an election while changing policies that would be beneficial to the company.

Recently in the U.S., the most frequent mentioned topic would be 2016 presidential election. People on both sides have donated to political campaigns from the very beginning. And one of the concerns is that can campaign donors write off any of these contributions on their federal income taxes? According to the IRS, the answer is a very clear NO. “You can’t deduct contributions made to a political candidate, a campaign committee, or a newsletter fund. Advertisements in convention bulletins and admissions to dinners or programs that benefit a political party or political candidate aren’t deductible,” informed in IRS Publication 529 (Political Contributions, 2015). It is also non-deductible for any of the portions of dues to lobbying or political activities. Public funding of Presidential elections means that qualified Presidential candidates receive federal government funds to pay for the valid expenses of their political campaigns in both the primary and general elections. Most political contributions, for the obvious reason of creating a more politically disinterested tax system, are not tax deductible.

Campaign Finance alludes to attempts to control the courses in which political crusades are supported. This incorporates all burning through done to advance or bolster the advancement of applicants, ticket measures, political gatherings and that's only the tip of the iceberg. Directions can be connected to regular people, enterprises, political activity boards of trustees, political gatherings and different associations. They can come as motivating forces, for example, giving open financing to applicants who maintain spending limits, and limitations, for example, commitment confines on givers. Authoritative endeavors, legal decisions and native activities have every single assumed

There is a problem with Congress. The previous sentence summarizes the collective sentiment of the general public concerning the legislative branch of the federal government. A 2010 Gallop poll revealed that over eighty-nine percent of Americans have no confidence in Congress (Lessig 2). It is theorized that Congress is so far out of favor because it has been unable to resolve the nation’s most important issues, such as Medicare, Medicaid, immigration reform, and the growing budget deficit, due to seemingly trivial reasons. Some theorize this lack of significant legislative action is due to growing partisanship between the system’s dominate political parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. According to Mark Brewer,

Money is both the nectar and poison of the human race. This fact has never been more applicable than to modern politics. Nearly all assets to a candidate for political office, such a media advertisements, travel expenses and campaign supplies rely on fiscal support. In an age when electronic media rules supreme, money has never been more important. Today, it has become necessary for political campaigns to pour massive amounts of funding into television, Internet, radio and print ads in order to run a competitive campaign. These ads are the most prominent form of communication between a candidate and the sovereigns, and therefore, a candidate’s ability to use ads can not be inhibited. This correlation between money and politics has many

“Young people are interested in politics, and do have faith in the democratic process. Nonetheless, the political system and the established parties and politicians that dominate it, are together failing to

rate so high. Because the party is much more likely to spend the soft money in places

Political corruption has existed throughout the ages. It believed to be most prominent in positions of power, because of the role money plays in getting people power. However, over the centuries, corruption has changed so much so as to not match a particular definition of corruption, perpetually growing deceptively harder to find (Ebbe).