Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Watergate scandal
Electoral reforms essays
Whitewater and Watergate
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Watergate scandal
The first main attempt to regulate campaign financing occurred in 1971 with the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). The act set requirements for disclosure of contributions to federal campaigns, both presidential and congressional. The main regulation to financing occurred though after its amendment in 1974. After reports of big financial abuses in the 1972 presidential election and the Watergate scandal, people wanted more constraints on financing particularly those from special interest groups. The act required strict disclosure of campaign donations. Candidates had to name all contributors who donated more than $200 a year. They also set up contribution limits and expenditure limits. Individuals could not contribute more than $1,000 to a candidate and political action committees (PACs) could not contribute more than $5,000. There were also limits on expenditures from a candidate’s personal fund and on total campaign expenditures (The FEC, 2011).
For presidential elections, the FECA instituted a public financing system to level the playing field and limit the amount of money spent on campaigning. During the primaries, there is a matching program where the government will match up to $250 of each contribution made to eligible candidates. In return, they agree to limit their spending. The other program is during the general election; the president receives a lump sum of money and in return they do not accept any further private donations.
The major provision to the FECA that resulted from the misuse of money and Watergate scandal is the prohibition of donations directly from corporations, labor organizations, and national banks. There were also prohibitions against donations from government contractors, foreign nationals, ca...
... middle of paper ...
... 2 Mar. 2011.
Mann, Thomas E. "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Is an Egregious Exercise of Judicial Activism." Brookings Institute. 26 Jan. 2010. Web. 2 Mar. 2011.
Mann, Thomas E. "Money in 2008: A Collapse of the Campaign Finance Regime?" Evolution and Revolution in the Nominations Process. Rowman and Littlefield, 2009. Print.
Martin, Patrick. "Corporate Cash Floods US Congressional Elections." The Market Oracle. Global Research, 2010. Web. 2 Mar. 2011. .
McCorkle, Mac. Lecture Notes. February 9, 2011
"The Oyez Project, Buckley v. Valeo." Oyez U.S. Supreme Court Media. IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. Web. 3 Mar. 2011. .
Weeks, Linton. "Did Obama Kill Public Campaign Finance." National Public Radio. 22 Oct. 2008. Web. 2 Mar. 2011.
Introduction In January of 2010, the United States Supreme Court, in the spirit of free speech absolutism, issued its landmark Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, marking a radical shift in campaign finance law. This ruling—or what some rightfully deem a display of judicial activism on the part of the Roberts Court and what President Obama warned would “open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in.elections” —effectively and surreptitiously overturned Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and portions of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, struck down the corporate spending limits imposed by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, and extended free speech rights to corporations. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief historical overview of campaign finance law in the United States, outline the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, and to examine the post-Citizens United political landscape. Campaign Finance in the United States During the Gilded Age—a period that began in the 1870s wherein the United States experienced tremendous economic growth—affluent industrialists such as John D. Rockefeller, Andrew W. Mellon, Cornelius Vanderbilt, J.P. Morgan, and Andrew Carnegie exercised, owing in large part to their wealth, enormous influence over the direction of American politics. Though left unaddressed during the Gilded Age, the issue of corporate involvement in political affairs was eventually identified as a corrosive problem in President Theodore Roosevelt’s 1904 State of the Union address.
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
“NEW YORK TIMES v. UNITED STATES.” The Oyez Project. llT Chicago-Kent College Of Law, n.d. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
Constitutional Commentary, Vol. 27, Issue 2 (Fall 2011), pp. 347-360 Volokh, Eugene 27 Const. Comment. 347 (2010-2011)
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
Campaign finance reform has a broad history in America. In particular, campaign finance has developed extensively in the past forty years, as the courts have attempted to create federal elections that best sustain the ideals of a representative democracy. In the most recent Supreme Court decision concerning campaign finance, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court essentially decided to treat corporations like individuals by allowing corporations to spend money on federal elections through unlimited independent expenditures. In order to understand how the Supreme Court justified this decision, however, the history of campaign finance in regards to individuals must be examined. At the crux of these campaign finance laws is the balancing of two democratic ideals: the ability of individuals to exercise their right to free speech, and the avoidance of corrupt practices by contributors and candidates. An examination of these ideals, as well as the effectiveness of the current campaign finance system in upholding these ideas, will provide a basic framework for the decision of Citizens United v. FEC.
Jost, Kenneth. "The Federal Judiciary." CQ Researcher 8.10 (1998). CQ Researcher. SAGE Publications. Web. 01 Mar. 2011. .
Ken Kollman, The American Political System, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2012), 25, 322-323, 330, 449.
SHELLEY v. KRAEMER. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 23 March 2014. .
Oct 1993. Retrieved November 18, 2010. Vol. 79. 134 pages (Document ID: 0747-0088) Published by American Bar Association
Just as Andrew Jackson had envisioned during the formation of the Democratic Party in the 1820's all organized political parties depend on the common working man to form their base. No matter how strong any party may appear at first glance its strength comes from the grass roots members in small communities throughout the country and goes upward and not from the top down. Many political leaders and organizers in the national political arena of today have forgotten this important fact.
Robert N. Clinton, ‘Judges Must Make Law: A Realistic Appraisal of the Judicial Function in a Democratic Society’ [1981-1982] 67 Iowa L. Rev. 711 http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/ilr67&div=38&g_sent=1&collection=journals accessed 12 February 2012
In a recently published paper, Adam Bonica and his associates have estimated that 0.01 percent of American households (one hundredth of one percent) contributed more than 40 percent of campaign contributions in 2012. This level is far higher than had been the case in recent years. In 1990 for example only about 10 percent of donations came from this small segment of the population. However, even the 40 percent figure represents an under-estimate. It does not include contributions to organizations that were not required to disclose their donors. Were they to be included, the figure would be even
The McCain – Feingold act (2002) Prohibited Unions and Corporations from using their respective treasury funds to engage in what is known as “Electioneering Communications”. However, the corporations and unions would be able to form Political Action Committees (PACs) in order to express political views either for or against a candidate.
Running an election campaign is very strenuous and time consuming. In many ways it is a balancing act. One must deal with maintaining public visibility, appealing to the voters, developing a platform, kissing disgusting babies, and meeting as many people as possible. However, one of the most important and difficult parts of the job is raising money. Money is necessary for all parts of the campaign, and without it, a campaign can grind to a halt. In this paper I will attempt to explain how a candidate gets the money to campaign.