It has been made evident throughout
my recent blog posts that campaign financing is a hot topic in the news lately.
Specifically, we are hearing more and more about the Super PACs. These Super
PACS, or political action committees, are not supposed to work directly with a
candidate, but their financial support helps political candidates
significantly with their campaigns.
In the New York Times, there is a
section, which focuses exclusively on campaign financing. One of the articles
in this section titled, “Campaign Finance (Super PACs),” discusses the 2012
Supreme Court decision made in Citizens
United v. Federal Election Commission, and how much it has impacted the
current presidential campaign. In this case, it ruled the government, “may not
ban independent political spending by corporations, as well as labor unions and
other organizations, in candidate elections”. Most people believe, “allowing corporate money to flood the
political marketplace will corrupt democracy”.
Many super PACs have a negative
image because of the attack ads they put out against opposing candidates. For
example, the video posted below shows an attack made against Obama from the
super-PAC American Crossroads.
Stephen Colbert, a “political satirist” who has entered the Republican presidential primary, has even created his own super-PAC. He has done so to poke fun at the concept of a super-PAC. To show this we need only to take a look at the name of his super-PAC “Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow”.
Once again, going back to the
Supreme Court decision of 2010, an article on NPR stated, “opponents argue
super-PACS distort the electoral landscape by drastically increasing the
expense of campaigns”. Due to this, Colbert has used his mock super-PAC as a
way to draw attention to their corruptness. The media has liked his concept,
considering how much attention they have been paying to it. It seems Colbert’s
mission has been accomplished.
I hope my mission has been accomplished as well, in informing you about the economic foundations involved in political campaigns. The media will surely be covering it even more as the elections creeps closer.
Sources:
Campaign Finance (Super PACs). The New York Times. (March 2012). Print.
"Super-PAC attacks Obama's open-mic gaffe in spy spoof". The Hill. (March 2012).
American Crossroads YouTube video.
"Stephen Colbert's Super-PAC comes to Austin". NPR. (March 2012).
Personally, I am not a fan at Super PACs. I agree with the statement that they "distort the electoral landscape" drastically. Because of the amounts of money and effort they are putting in to support a particular candidate, they are automatically recognized for being powerful and controlling. These Super PACs have the ability to control almost any election and steer a particular candidate in one direction if they donate large enough sums of money. This fact scares me. Whatever happened to the notion that money can't by you love(or in this case an election)? That went out the window a while ago with these Super PACs in control.
ReplyDelete~Taylor Smelt
I originally sided with the supreme court on their original verdict and thought Super PACs where a fundamental right for individuals and corporations to create... that being said, over the course of this past election, I have seen Super PACs contribute nothing beneficial to the electoral process. Maybe they need to be better regulated, maybe there need to be a reversal in the decision, but for the most part I am disappointed in the negative impact/nature of most Super PAC contributions.
ReplyDelete-Matthew Morris