Buying Power
There are an estimated 120 million families living in the United States. Of these, 158 families have contributed over half of the campaign money that has gone towards the candidates in the upcoming presidential election. These ultra-rich, mostly self made, politically active billionaires have put forth small fortunes to back the candidates and the issues they support. Mostly they are right wing (138 of the families have contributed to republican campaigns while only 20 have contributed to democratic campaigns.) Through the utilization of super-PACs, every single one of these families has contributed over $250,000 to their respective presidential candidate or party compared to the average American household that donates about $21.17. These hyper wealthy individuals convert their monetary worth into political clout effectively by pumping funds into policies they agree with. Is this vast imbalance in funding ethical? Also, should super PACs be utilized if they allow extremely wealthy individuals to donate more than they should be legally allowed?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't think super PACs and the imbalance in funding they create are ethical. Because there's no limit to how much people can donate to a campaign through a super PACs, wealthy Americans have too much power in political matters and too much influence over who wins elections. Super PACs are primarily used to support Republican candidates, but the majority of Americans are Democrats who can't afford to donate hundreds of thousands of dollars to support Democratic candidates. So, super PACs should be discontinued.
ReplyDeleteI agree, I do not think the imbalance in campaign funding is ethical. I believe that super PACs should be abolished because they give even more power t the already empowered wealthy elites. The majority of private money should be wiped from campaign funding.
ReplyDeleteOn one hand, I think it is unethical to have funding like this because it is putting too much power into the hands of too miniscule of a percentage. But on the contrast, I am conflicted because who is the government to say what we can and cannot spend our money on? If a person earns a large income, why shouldn't they be allowed to put their money into the political party of their choice? The government has no place intervening in what someone decides to purchase with his or her money.
ReplyDeleteIt is not the in the governments power to say what people can spend their money on and while I personally do not think these super PACS are ethical from I purely rights based argument they have to be legal.
ReplyDeleteFreedom of expression with money should not extend without bounds to elections. How can we allow candidates to accept so much money and call the system democratic? Politicians vote to serve the needs of their donors. They are elected based on their promises but abandon them once money becomes involved.
ReplyDeleteDidn't we already read this article?
ReplyDeleteBut anyway, I don't think it is at all ethical for these families to be allowed to donate so much money to campaigns; they are the definition of political elites, and their ability to donate so much money gives them a disproportionate share of political influence, which is completely against what our form of government stands for. No one entity should have that much influence in politics, as their views would be viewed as more important than those of people who cannot donate so much to political campaigns. Politicians are supposed to represent the interests of every one of their citizens, not just those of the people who contributed the most to their campaign.
That being said, because super PACs enable these large-scale donations by acting as a loophole, they are absolutely unethical.
Money and politics go hand in hand, but that also means playing with fire. It's not ethical that few people have such major influence over politics. Campaigns in general waste too much money and if those running are not truly backed by the percentage of America's population than who are we voting for? Super PACs and any other extra influence that wealthy families have on politics should be stopped now so that we have a fairer, better represented system of elections.
ReplyDelete