Without the influence of money in our elections and the donations from corporations and sponsors, then our political campaign system would be chaotic, full of illegal funding, and secrecy. According to The Atlantic, if restrictions were put on the amount of campaign money spent then wealthy donors, corporations, and unions would be able to spend unlimited amounts of money and may do it in secrecy. Secret donations would make the government and politicians seem less trustworthy because it would be harder to track who and where the money is coming from. Along with spending money in secret, there is the possibility of super pacs coming together outside of a candidate's campaign and spending unlimited amounts of money. According to Opensecrets, super pacs are independent expenditure-only committees that raise money from donors outside of a campaign in order to advocate for or against any specific political candidate.
Currently, the electoral voters are the only ones with a direct vote in the election. In order for the election to be more reflective of the citizens’ wishes, the popular vote should become more significantly tied to the election. The Electoral College should not be the most prominent voting process, when the popular vote should be more important. The risk of untrustworthy electors increases, which causes the voter to feel that they are being cheated out of their votes, which may discourage them from voting in the future. There is also the high possibility in which neither candidates receive the majority of electoral votes required to win election, such as what occurred in the 1824 election, meaning the House of Representatives would have to decide who becomes
For the establishment to actively contemplate and strategize an avenue to change convention rules, to take delegation votes away from Donald Trump is an egregious insult to the American public who voted in the primary. The actions of the party, to include those delegates who conspired to turn those votes over to a different candidate, who by the way did not exist, sadly make the Democratic Party appear to they be the party of the American public. Yes, a significant percentage of voters think the Democratic Party is corrupt, however, even contemplating a method to alter or reallocate those votes designated for Donald Trump screams of the parties contempt for the American
The effect of this tax could be seen as a positive or a negative. When it comes to the research the tax has affected the country in a negative way, simply because the war was fought because of taxes that were seen as not needed as well the fact that the country fought the British to oppose taxes, and then Washington turns around and imposes a tax on the people after what they sacrificed to fight for the right to be free of taxes and to be supportive of their new government was tough because people did not have money to pay taxes at
But recently gerrymandering has become more controversial because people feel that it has taken away their rights as a voter and it swings the votes to one side by a big percentage. Current cases are before the courts to decide if gerrymandering is legal. Some states have been discussing whether it should still be allowed during elections. “Many efforts are underway to remedy this political
I say this because they gave their support to the Parliament, and not the King. Power is a very dangerous thing, and it causes many rivalries. Too much power for the King can turn him into a dictator. One person should not gave complete power in any situation. The King also raised taxes without any consultation, and this can effect the citizens greatly.
It is also believed that the Electoral College makes potential voters not want to vote at all and they end up not representing their candidates. And most people already have a certainty of the outcome of the election, meaning they already know who will win the election based on the number of votes so far in the popular votes section and the electoral section. The system of electors is also not fair because the people can not control who they are voting for has the electors, and the states number of electors are equal to the number of people on its congressional delegation, which gives big states an advantage over small states. To conclude this letter, I again say that the Electoral College should be changed to election by popular vote because, popular vote is fairer then the Electoral College, the people have no power compared to the electors and the are subject to corruption with in the
According to, (Grofman & Feld), authors of Thinking About the Political Impacts of the Electoral College, "it has been argued that one party may develop a “built-in” advantage in the Electoral College if its strength comes disproportionately from the smaller states" (Grofman, & Feld, 2005). Although, candidates focusing more on the competitive states leave much of the county barely aware that there is even a presidential election going on. Mostly because these states have higher electoral votes. This discourages voter turnout because the individual vote only matters to the context of the state (Constitution,
complications like surgery medical test medical examinations training may have effects on war itself in my opinion I think the president was looking out for military benefits the president looks at it as transgender people holding the military down from creating progress and growing. the president did have many reasons for why what morally it 's wrong to deny people of the United States citizens themselves the right to 5 for the country the right to protect the one they love denying these people rights to enlist in the army is like taken away they 're taking away their dignity and responsibilities as
If voters have doubts whether their votes are counted correctly or the process was not impartial then they might feel that the results do not match their desires. The legitimacy of those who are elected weakens when these doubts arise, both of the individual representatives as that of the parliament as a whole. This could ultimately undermine the strengths of the democratic process and institutions in a country. (Lehoucq 2002). Also, voter trust in elections is not the same as support for government in a democracy as that is known as political trust.
The flaws with the current establishment are rooted more deeply than how we elect people in the current democracy. The author argues we’d be better off if we scrapped congressional elections altogether and instead filled the House of Representatives with 435 Americans selected lottery-style from the population. While low voter turnout does contribute to the issues, the answer is not to abolish it. The power of choice is one of the most undervalued traits of a democracy that many have put their lives on the line and even died for. My answer to the prompt question is that The Lottocracy is not a viable alternative to the U.S.’s current system of electoral representative democracy.
The implications of this would be that jobs in the country would significantly overdriven by Americans who may be searching for jobs but unable to get one due to jobs held by illegal immigrants. This issue is without a doubt completely over race, Trump claims that Mexicans are stealing jobs Americans could have. Although he is correct, he is choosing a very extreme stance and that is why he is receiving ridicule. This problem has really divided the parties, most democrats are not in favor of the wall and believe that it would just be a huge financial inconvenience that we should not bestow upon ourselves or another
Many citizens were simply unaware of the crucial elements of the tax policy: corporate dividends, program length or longer term beneficiaries of the policies, and those who did relied on partisans. (Bartels 177). He cites the same survey to offer an explanation for the support of a policy that conflicts with relevant policy preferences; specifically, he states voters had an “unenlightened self-interest” and some had formed a “simple-minded” opinion on the policy (175). Those who felt they paid too much in taxes generally supported the policy, this perspective was more pertinent than even political ideology and partisanship (179). Overall, Bartel’s argument was that policy ignorance and misinformation, combined with “misguided” views about personal taxation led to the public “support” of the 2001 Bush Tax cuts.
Bernie Sanders has a “paper theory.” Which means, it works in theory, on paper, but cannot actually be applied. With the help of bias news stations and social media, the upcoming presidential election has been causing a mighty uproar across the nation. Although the of the candidates have strong yet different opinions, if Bernie Sanders becomes president and upholds only a fraction of his promises, the country would be worse off than it is now. Raising minimum
With statistics shown about how the number of electors each state gets isn 't even fair, and that smaller states really do get more of an advantage it leads me to really question why they even have this system. America is about freedom, the freedom to choose your leader, the freedom to vote for laws, and the freedom to vote for who is eligible to pass these laws. If we are promised all these freedoms why is it that there is a whole complicated system not everyone even knows about that actually proves the popular votes of the people do not decipher our president? I believe it should be banned from use due to the unfairness of the process as a