The Pros And Cons Of Campaign Finance Reform

Supporters of this decision argued that money does not corrupt, while critics believe that it is basically bribery (Montana). In 2011, the state of Montana tried to challenge the US Supreme Court decision by arguing that outside money caused corruption. Montana wanted to uphold their 1912 Corrupt Law, which banned corporations from giving money to campaigns and also acquired disclosure on who gave money to campaigns (Big Sky). The state did not want outside groups manipulating the message and ads of their elections or influencing voters. When it came to the court decision, the court made a 5-to-2 vote, stating that the state of Montana “cannot ignore the Citizens United decision” (Montana).

Each expansion of the suffrage in the United States has met some extent of resistance from those who have a hold on power. The reason as to why they resist the expansion of suffrage is because their scope of power would be reduced with this expansion. The traditional elites who are in power avoid the scrutiny of their actions by the public, treating the other elite members preferentially for instance, by ensuring them immunity from the law or awarding them lucrative contracts, and using those who are not entitled to

I believe that all members of the Texas legislature should be term-limited. I think that since the President of the United States has term-limited. It would only be fair that all branches within the government to practice term-limited as well. So far, there has only been fifteen states that practice term-limited (Maine, California, Colorado, Arkansas, Michigan, Florida, Ohio, South Dakota, Montana, Arizona, Missouri, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Louisiana, and Nevada).

"How Democratic is the American Constitution ?", by political scientist Robert A. Dahl is a short book that questions the ethical and political issues in America 's Constitution and the structure of the United States government. The book consists of a series of abstract lectures composed by Dahl that reflects on how the American Constitution affects modern society. While this short book brings out plentiful knowledge on the American system , it does not go any deeper into those general ideas for it is only about 200 pages. However, it is still a knowledgeable book to introduce the fundamentals of American government and political science and why American citizens should uphold the Constitution. Dahl introduces the book of how the Founding

Over time our Constitution of the United States has given us more voting privileges. We’ve allowed most of our population to be able to vote now in 2017. The only people who can’t are people under the age of 18, aren’t registered, or not a citizen.

Do you feel insignificant during elections? Do you worry that there is too much money in politics? Do you believe that campaigns are corrupt? All these common worries become real issues in 2010 with Citizens United v. FEC: a Supreme Court ruling that will forever be significant to elections. The Citizens United ruling "opened the door" for unrestricted campaign spending by corporations, but most importantly the case led to the formation of groups called super PACs: corporations or labor unions that have the ability to use its general treasury and unlimited donations to influence elections.

Filibuster is known as a “the effort by a senator to delay the chamber’s business by making long speeches” (Bond, 726). This tactic is used normally when a senator wants to have a bill be ignored so it won’t pass. They do this by taking all of the available time for the bill by talking or making a speech. Which means that the filibuster is believed to impair with the political process. A lot of people believe it should end while others do not see the harm. This controversial topic has even been the topic for various movies including the 1939 movie, Mr. Smith goes to Washington. With such a great exposure, is it really that bad?

A democracy is a government in the hands of men not corporations. In a 2010 Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. F.E.C permitted corporations and unions to make political expenditures from their treasuries directly and through other organizations, as long as the spending is done independently of any candidate. With this court ruling, big business and wealthy individuals have gained an unfair advantage over the political system by utilizing their vast income to influence elections, and other matters of the government. Therefore campaign finance should be reformed because the wealthy individuals and organizations have unlimited control over mainstream media, they are granted access to the government, and foreign countries can secretly influence our government in their favor. Campaign spending is out of control.

The Voting Rights Act was one of the most revolutionary bills ever passed by the congressional legislation in the United States. President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the bill into law on August 6th, 1965, not only as part of politics but also, a depiction of morals. Since 1965, it has protected minority voters at the polls, but it has been fifty years since the Voting Rights Act has been passed and it is still a controversial topic that is constantly debated on today. The voting rights of all minorities throughout the country are once again under attack which impacts one’s ability to exercise his or her constitutional right as a citizen.

Is Gerrymandering a Controversial Topic? Gerrymandering is a process where the ruling political party uses the map of their state to draw lines that create voting districts in favor of their party. The result of this is that it doesn’t reflect the voters political views. For about 200 years the government has used gerrymandering during political elections and it continues to be used today (King, Elizabeth) .

The Citizens United Ruling made by Supreme Court in 2010 only made the issue of money ruling the elections worse. Its main effects, stated in the video, “paved the way” for big corporations or unions to spend as much money as they feel necessary in elections and the political process. They can utilize this rule through advertisements, messages, and many different ways of communication to potential and up and coming voters. It changed the way campaigns were carried out by not only putting a bigger emphasis on the political spending from candidates and outside organizations, but also in a sense demerits the aspect of democracy, with having the amount money spent on a campaign be noticed more than the voices of the people. Voting does not really represent the country, but rather, represents the rich and powerful of the country.

Gerrymandering restrictions is likely to be a key topic of debate for the Supreme Court as partisan lines have tested the constitutionality of the act. While this process of redrawing boundary lines has been around for a long time, it is not the same that it once was. The act of gerrymandering and redrawing boundaries has become more of a drastic partisan act in the modern election world than ever before because of technology. The 1986 Supreme Court ruling in Davis v. Bandemer declared partisan gerrymandering for electoral advantage justiciable under the United States Constitution. The asymmetry standard in testing for gerrymandering states that the act needs to exhibit intentions that partisan gerrymandering would be recognized for its given distribution of popular votes, if parties switch who holds the popular vote and if the number of seats in a district would change unequally based on Supreme Court cases Vieth v. Jubelirer and LULAC v. Perry. Unfortunately, this standard is not the precedent established by the Supreme Court. The current argument headed to the Supreme Court in 2017 is that partisan gerrymandering is quietly producing a greater effect on the nation than ever before and needs to be addressed by the highest level of judiciary for its

In everyday conversations a subject that frequently tends to arise is American politics. During these conversations a variation of sub topics often occur usually pertaining to the Army’s funding, elections, and the different political parties. One of these topics that tends to cause a lot of feuding is the different political parties. In my family alone, we partake in disputes based on our different political parties, I am a Democrat while my parents are Republican. Often, we participate in quarrels over different events that occur in society. However which kind of views represent a certain political party. For starters, Which views does a Democrat stand with? Perhaps one who is Democrat abhors abortion, or possibly despises the LGBTQ community. Although maybe a

Money got the same meaning as “culture”. Men and women were disillusioned about politics, love, or family, but they believed that the most important is negotiable legal tender. “ On a chance we tried an important-looking door, and walked into a high Gothic library, paneled with carved English oak, and probably transported complete from some ruin overseas... He waved his hand toward the book-shelves. “About that...They’re real.”

We see multiple successes of voting equality attempted through amendments, however, the Supreme Court’s decision on Shelby County v. Holder has pushed back years and years of effort for voting rights. Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling was in Shelby County’s favor, stating that the Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional along with Section 5. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr, who wrote the majority’s opinion, said that the power to regulate election was reserved to the states, not the federal government. As a result to the court’s decision, the federal government can no longer determine which voting law discriminates and can be passed. After the case, many states had freely passed new voting laws; the most common voting law states passed