Home > Learning > Negative money in Politics

Negative money in Politics

The subject that I found most interesting this trimester in Government was how money affects the polls in America. Is it detrimental to the process or does it help the candidates overall? This is a good question because many people argue that it’s very difficult for the candidate that isn’t getting a lot of money flowing in to his campaign to win and share his ideas.

I’m going to first talk about how I think this is hurtful to the polls. First of all the negative effects of certain candidates getting a ton of money is that it doesn’t give the other running candidates ample opportunity to express their views to the public due to the fact that they just simply do not get much air time, interviews, etc. Companies are able to openly support a certain candidate of their choice meaning that huge fortune 500 companies could give huge sums of money helping their campaign trail advertisements because they cannot directly give them money for their campaign; which helps them hugely because with all that money they can easily get their name on more commercials, magazines, in the public eye more than their opponents .The Government stepped in and said that this was indeed constitutional due to freedom of speech; so the Government decided that companies could openly announce what candidate that they supported and give them large donations. They said “The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the government may not keep corporations from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections.” (http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/01/citizens-united-v-fec-in-plain-english/)  this is awesome for candidates getting these huge sums of money, but for those not getting so much money flow it can hurt. If a candidate gets the backing of these huge companies it can sweep elections. The Government justices said they were concerned with these companies spending huge sums of money; their main argument was that companies are not necessarily people so they should not have the same freedom of speech as everyone else. Companies can indeed sway the public’s views and votes in my opinion.

They can use all that money for commercials and use propaganda on other candidates, which ultimately makes the public, think twice about the person that they are voting for.  Eugene Volokh is a professor of law and he was quoted saying “These corporations overtly editorialize for and against candidates, and also influence elections by choosing what to cover and how to cover it.” Meaning that yes these corporations can negatively effect the polls by giving certain candidates a lot of exposure of sabotaging the ones that they don’t agree with. (http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/how-corporate-money-will-reshape-politics/)  “the court decision means that voters will have more messages from more sources — including wealthy unions and wealthy corporations -– to supplement the messages they already get from wealthy media corporations, wealthy political parties, wealthy advocacy groups, and wealthy individuals, as well as from not-so-wealthy neighbors, bloggers, and others.”

So, overall all of this money from huge corporations is bad for the polls because it doesn’t give other people to positively speak their ideas in the mainstream where the public can have easy access to it. In my opinion only individuals should be able to give money to the candidate of their choice.

Categories: Learning Tags: , ,
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: