Who Runs America? Give Evidence

The government of the United States is bought and sold like stocks. Billionaires and corporations have poured an incomprehensible amount of money into thousands of political campaigns. According to opensecrets.org, the average cost to win a senate race is now $11,474,362. For the 2016 presidential race alone the Koch brothers plan on spending $889 million. It is nearly impossible to win an election without the support of billionaires and corporations. The impact that money has on elections has spiraled of control. A political revolution to fix the power the wealthy have in politics is already happening. Senator Bernie Sanders is the one leading this revolution. Even without the revolutionary policies, Sanders would set in place to end the American Oligarchy his campaign is still important. Sanders leading by example and showing the country that it is possible to run a campaign without support from the elite. Sanders campaign has raised $75 million so far with an average donation of only $25. If

Time magazine shows how much popularity and support Sanders has received (“The Gospel” 34). A politician who is not afraid to stand up for what he or she trusts will make this nation grow for the future. Bernie Sanders shows this nation that if freedom and equality is given regardless of what color skin you are, where you come from, or how much money and power you have, will make a better

It is time that the voters are the only one’s deciding elections. Candidates should be running on issues, not money. They should not be allowed to get money from wealthy investors, who keep the playing field unlevel. Any person who wants to run for office, and is qualified to run for office, should be able to regardless if they have a lot of money to set up a campaign or not. It is time for Campaign Finance Reform.

Trump may be known for his wealth but many aspects has shown that he is definitely bad in business. As president, being good in business is one of the key aspects to succeed, because you have to handle the whole nation’s financial matters. Trump boasted that he earned his own money, but he isn’t like Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg, who are self-made billionaires who were innovators in their fields. Instead, Trump’s wealth is inherited from his father. Almost all his best-known successes are deducible to family ties or money given to him by his

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

It is unsensible to believe that even the upper crest of the US financially can keep up with a corporation. Therefore receiving donations from corporations is the candidate's main goal, while ignoring the many small donors that truly represent America’s views. While there is no solid proof of corporations influencing candidates decisions thee have been sketchy moment in which corporations money influencing candidates decisions have been suspected. In 2000 when Bush was running for president an energy company based in Houston, Enron donated a substantial amount of money to Bush. They donated 2.5 million making them the highest donating energy company and the 36th highest corporate donator. After Bush was elected he passed 6 bills extremely beneficial for Enron that multiplied their revenue by nearly three times. In all Corporations donating limitless to candidates forces a candidate to pass bills beneficial for their donors and not the majority of people. This needs to stop or the purity of America’s political system goes down the

In the Presidential race of 2008, it is estimated that the combined spending of outside groups, political parties, and candidates totaled to over five billion dollars (Beneson and Tarr 2012). American politics has created a culture of “political elites” that requires every candidate to raise millions of dollars. Although organizations like the FEC tracks these large sums of money, the amount of money a person must spend publicizing and promoting themselves has become uncontrollable. Jeb Bush’s Super PAC has already raised over 103 million dollars and filmed countless hours of interviews of the Candidate, skirting regulations within McCain-Feingold that prevent outside sources from directly creating scripts and advertisements with the Bush campaign (Miller and Elliot 2015). Although Bush and his supporters may have the constitutional right to raise millions of dollars, and publish deceptive advertisements, their actions still promote a sentiment of power that should not be allotted to one person. Regardless of the strides that have been made to reduce corruption within campaign finance reform, and support citizen’s most basic freedoms to support whichever candidate they wish, the entire campaign process has become too politically elite. The necessity for million dollar campaigns and extensive financial backing prevents

On Tuesday, February 9 Democrat Bernie Sanders and Republican Donald Trump won the New Hampshire primaries. With these two wins it is apparent that more than just a political tide is overcoming America, but a populist tide is. Using populism, both Sanders and Trump have tapped into the economic and political frustration of the middle class, projecting them to top and forcing “establishment” candidates to either adapt or drop out. Sanders and Trump may be ideologically different, but their methods as politicians are similar.

The impact of Sander 's proposal of increasing taxes for those much wealthy have to be taken into consideration. Bernie Sanders insists on American citizens to agree with his plan to increase the estate tax on the top three-tenths of one percent of Americans who obtain more than 3.5 million dollars. The large corporations, and companies who are a part of that percent must pay their equal share of taxes. Because these corporations shift their jobs, and earnings overseas, these corporations bypass paying millions in taxes. The amount of tax revenue these corporations would bring in if they paid their taxes is a heavy amount of six hundred and twenty billion dollars. This large amount collected can be properly

In his article in the Huffington post on Aug. 8th, Pinaire expressed his confusion and irritation over the Black Lives Matter movement co-founder Marissa Janae Johnson’s very public protest which completely shut down Bernie Sander’s ability to address the crowd of thousands who had come to hear what he had to say. As a presidential candidate, Senator Sanders intended to speak about the issues of Social Security and Medicare which greatly effect the elderly and poor.

Bernie Sanders ran for political office in the town of Burlington, Vermont in 1981 and was elected mayor. He created many projects to improve the town in ways of housing, taxation, child care, women’s rights, and youth programs. In this same context, he created the Burlington Community Land Trust, an award winning project. He has also shown that he is no stranger to competing with those who have money on their side. In 2006 Bernie Sanders became a candidate for Vermont’s seat in the senate, running against the richest man in the state. To the voters of Vermont, upbringing, education, and political awareness mattered more than wealth. Despite the odds, Sanders won the seat, proving that money is irrelevant in a truly democratic race.

Bernie Sander is a socialist who is currently running for 2016 presidential election. However, sanders believe that he a democratic socialist. From my point of view, I believe he is a socialist. He frames his political view that we must create an economy that works for all, not just the very wealthy. His fight for equal treatment of the poor and middle class and against the billionaire class is the central focus of his campaign, and the socialist mantle has positioned him further left of Center than Clinton. He aimed toward providing free college; and there are many more things that sander’s want to promise to the people of the United States. Bernie Sander wants to provide equality for all; and that what make him a socialist. I think it unfair

In a country built from unparalleled equality, our election system is not inclusive of the less affluent candidates. Inevitably, monetary funding has become a centralized focus point for American politics and has provided a reckless entry way for candidates not prepared for the presidency. Taking this current election for example, Hillary Clinton, democratic presidential candidate, received a donation of 25.6 million dollars from the Hedge-Fund, this being only a small fraction of her over all funding. Contrastingly, Jill Stein, Green Party Candidate, has only received 3.2 million dollars in total funding for her campaign. The difference is striking. Providing a

As the 2016 Presidential Election starts to close in on the primaries, we are now beginning to see the front-runners in both political parties. Donald Trump, who has been far ahead of the other Republican candidates almost the entire race, seems more and more likely to snag the Republican nominee, while Bernie Sanders has continued to climb in the polls on the Democratic side. Whether the next President is going to be Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, or another candidate, it is inevitable that they will have to come up with a plan for gun control, health care, and have a foreign policy that can deal with the problems we face today. As Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders both represent different parties, some of their ideas still overlap one

Sanders is playing up his underdog station, and showing that his support is from individuals, in smaller contributions, rather than the heavy hitters, or what anti-establishment or status quo supporters, often refer to as the 1%. Both are running as alternatives to a system that is not functioning as well as it should. Both have not been lifelong members of a political party; Mr. Trump, a newcomer to politics and having switched parties, while Mr. Sanders still refers to himself as a Vermont