The case Citizens United help open the door for Super PACs. It seems that Americans love many things super sized, their cars, homes & now their politics! Should there be a limit on the amount that someone can give? It seems that now more than ever we do need limitations. Corporations, individuals, and unions are able to give Super PACs unlimited amounts of money as long as there is no correct coordination with a candidate. But, what does direct coordination mean? It seems that even if a former employee, good friend, or big donor heads a super PAC it's okay. Does that seem right?
Was this how the Supreme Court envisioned the outcome of the Citizens' United case? I think many would argue no! We want there to be a true democracy which means that there has to be equal access for everyone and not just the few. The people who have the most wealth therefore have more access than ever before, as money is the key to access in politics. Take Newt Gingrich's campaign, he received through a Super PAC started by a wife & husband $10 million which kept on the race. As NPR recently discussed isn't this keeping & enforcing candidates beholden to certain people or interests?
These new PACs are only going to make people already skeptical about politics & voting even more skeptical. The adage "My vote doesn't count" has never been a viable excuse to me, until now?
No comments:
Post a Comment