Essay on The Problem with PACs

According to Michael Stinnett who wrote an article about the negative consequences of super PACs on elections he says Super PACs “allowing wealthy donors to buy elections”(Stinnett). His fear is due to Super PACs having very lax campaigning rules and regulations it has the potential to let the wealthy few give all of their money to people who once in office support bills and law that will be beneficial for the donors. Michael Stinnett even went as far as saying “Super PACs are a pernicious influence on society and should be abolished”(Stinnett). Not only does he has this negative feeling about Super PACS, But he shares them with approximately two-thirds of americans who understand the new rules according to a new study done by the pew research center (pew

Interest groups have a lot of influence over decision that the government makes and has made. These groups, when formed right, are highly organized and have a definite agenda they are trying to push that is important to them. Interest groups will lobby in congress as well as other levels of government to get new laws and regulations passed.

That is one reason why the public has come to reject the idea of the Super PACs. It has the turned the political campaign into a shallow, reality television, mud-slinging type of contest from which the candidates can never return. The ads being run in the newspapers, television, and radio stations cost these candidates and Super PACs money that could have been used for better political means such as contributions to charitable organizations by the candidates or their support groups on their behalf. That sort of act would have had a greater political impact upon the voting public than an ad campaign explaining the ills of Newt Gingrich. Even more sickening, is the fact that most of the candidates will feign knowledge of participation in any negative campaign movements because of the independent nature of the Super PACs. The candidate can deny any involvement in the act all the while coordinating with his Super PAC under the radar of mass media. These negative campaigns leave the candidate free and clear of any involvement as all the Super PAC has to do is run the ad with a clear disclaimer absolving the candidate the ad supports of any wrong doing because the ad was not sanctioned by the candidate or political party.

Interest groups are structured groups which try to influence government to adopt certain policies or measures. The responsibilities of an interest group can be never-ending. One of the main responsibilities of an interest group is giving the underrepresented a chance to speak out on issues they are passionate about. The Rainbow/Push Coalition is an interest group I believed I would be passionate about.

With companies already so strictly divided on the issues it makes it easy for lobbyists with aligning issues to jump on the bandwagon and provide monetary support assuming the candidate always votes the way that they please. The argument against the fight against big lobbyists is that it violates the first amendment, and that not only big oil and other companies of this nature are to blame. This only does to reaffirm my point! This issue is still being viewed as an “us versus them” problem, when in reality the whole system is flawed. Its not that left wing lobbying is bad and right is good or vice versa. It is that it is all bad, and it is all corrupting. The evil doesn’t lie in WHAT the group makes a candidate vote for, it is the fact that it makes a candidate vote for something at all. And now it has become a battle, between Exxon and green Peace, between WWF and Sunoco. People need to realize that they’re all a problem not simply one or another. In our current situation, partisan lobbyists are up in arms due to the fact that they don’t believe they’re getting enough money from the president’s new stimulus bill. They are arguing the first amendment rights to squeeze more money out of a very partisan bill already to get more money for their clients as if they need it! The country is verging on depression and they choose now to complain that their millionare clients aren’t quite rich

According to Bardes, Shelly, and Schmidt (2010), an interest group is “an organized group of individuals sharing common objectives who actively attempt to influence policymakers” (p. 225). In America, our government is guided by interest groups who uses different techniques to try to persuade politicians to advocate for their beliefs. The National Organization for Women (NOW) is one example of the many interest group in America that is lobbying for their ideology. NOW is a beneficial interest group because it fights for women inequality and also supports Amendment I in the Constitution.

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is a "law that requires all candidates to fully disclose all contributions and expenditures in excess of $100." (pg.161) This law proved very helpful because in 1968, before they really started pushing disclosure, candidates would report spending $8.5 million but four years later candidates were reporting that they had spent about $88.9 million. It was a giant leap in what they were spending, over ten times the said amount. The FECA also made it to where "it was permissible for corporations and labor unions to set up separate, segregated funds that could be used for a political purpose." (pg.161) Having this created a lot of PACs that would give political parties and interest groups money to running

An interest group also known as a special interest group or a lobby is an organized group of individuals, organizations, or businesses who share a goal. The interest group forms an alliance in support of their cause to influence public policy and government officials in the group 's favor. The goal of the group could be focused on small group, such as the Japan Eraser Manufacturer 's Association; or the goal could be focused on a large public group, such as family and friends of public school-aged children in the United States. Clive S. Thomas states, "The most important lobbying forces in any society are the various entities of government: national, regional, and local government agencies and institutions such as the military" (Thomas).

Super political action committee (PAC) was created in July 2010 based on the outcome of a federal court case ruling “SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission”. Super PAC committees have the right to raise unlimited funds with not stopping in sight. Based on the fact of Super PACs being committee driven, there has been political committees influencing different political bases with money to help move committee agendas.

Considering the presidential primary season is underway, there is a lot of debate around whether or not Super PACs are considered a form of corruption in government. Many Americans believe that because of Super PACs, the elected candidate will favor the ideals of the large-contributors who helped fund their campaign “indirectly”. This paper seeks to analyze the extent to which Super PACs may corrupt democracy. Using surveys from the Brennan Center for Justice and data from both Yale and Seton Hall Law, we discover theories on how people view Super PACs and their role in American democracy. The conclusion of our research suggests that Super PACs are undemocratic in both the sense that only a very small proportion of Americans actually get to

Political action committees (PACs) have gained influence throughout political history. However, their gain of influence does not play a role in their acceptance from political parties. People believe political action committees influence the legislature. Political action committees raise money for political campaigns and other political issues. As Elizabeth Drew said, “The process by which Congress is supposed to function have been distorted, if not overwhelmed, by the role of money. The ability of even the best of legislators to focus on broad questions, to act independently, or to lead has been seriously impaired.” This leads to people believing political action committees influence political official’s views on issues in the government. The increase in political action committees are said to influence and help the political officials that are going to run for office again, because they want to get more money from the political action committees for their next political campaign. However, the supporters of political action committees say they allow average citizens the right to let their voices be heard in the political process. Another argument political action committees express is the First Amendment. The people who support certain candidates believe that donating money is an act of Freedom of Speech. Still many people oppose them. There is a bipartisan consensus on the dislike of political action committees. It may be said that political action committees are a

An interest group is a group of people who try to influence government. Each group has a specific target area in which they desire to influence government policy. Many groups are single issue groups, such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Others seek to influence policy in a particular field, like healthcare or civil rights. This usually involves discussion about a range of issues. In either case, interest groups exist to influence political decision-making at the highest levels.

An interest group also known as a special interest group or a lobby is an organized group of individuals, organizations, or businesses who share a goal. The interest group forms an alliance in support of their cause to influence public policy and government officials in the group 's favor. The goal of the group could be focused on small group, such as the Japan Eraser Manufacturer 's Association; or the goal could be focused on a large public group, such as family and friends of public school-aged children in the United States. "The most important lobbying forces in any society are the various entities of government: national, regional, and local government agencies and institutions such as the military" (Thomas).???????????

Political parties and pressure groups are dependent upon one another. Interest groups find the parties an important method of gaining access to those in public authority, and the parties need the support of groups to elect and maintain themselves in power. The loose party structure and the nature of the federal system foster a chain of continuous relationships between the two. Interest groups participate in both nonpartisan and partisan primaries and general elections through candidate endorsement, providing campaign funds, and general campaign activity. Interest groups are particularly interested in programs and seek to influence party platforms and may provide speech materials for candidates. There is some attempt on the part of both to infiltrate each other though rarely has an interest group been able to capture complete control of a party organization. The overlapping memberships help to educate the parties about the interests of the private groups and vice versa, and provide some cross-fertilization of ideas as well as manpower assistance. Political parties have a prime function of accommodating the demands of the private interests into the larger public interests (Bone. A, 1958).

A group can become a political interest group. A political interest group can make demands or influence the demands of society on an institution of government