ソースを表示

While we can debate if the Top court decision in Citizen's United that opened the entranceway to unlimited money in political campaigns from corporations and wealthy individuals was right or wrong, the truth is this ruling has been made and it is unlikely to become reversed. And what is not debatable is that money is pouring into election campaigns, at this time particularly on the republican side, from big business and rich those who desire to influence things because of their chosen candidate or against another.

[http://www.dontdrinktheteaparty.org paul ryan] - This silver lining within the Supreme Court ruling was that Super PACs must disclose their donors as well as the amount they donated. Perhaps this might reduce the quantity of later corruption as a result of must pay back these mega donors - at least the general public will be conscious of the number of choices. If a corporation donates seven figures with a GOP Super PAC that supports a particular candidate, and that corporation would benefit from having environmental regulations lifted, people may be fully conscious of this possibility and call him up or her on it.

The bigger question, then, is whether or not men and women actually take time to pay attention to where this Super PAC funds are coming from, and what these mega donors hope to influence with their money. Already there is certainly evidence the system is finding loopholes which will hurt this technique. The most obvious spirit from the dependence on disclosure of donors ended up being to permit the voter to totally understand the location where the campaign messages are coming from before each election. This can be a vital step up ensuring a well-informed voter. Yet we view that Super PACs have got advantage of a delay tactic that enables them sometimes to have to wait to disclose their donors until after voting has brought place - in the case of the 2012 Republican primaries, until after the important voting in Iowa, New Hampshire and Sc.

[http://www.dontdrinktheteaparty.org mitt romney] - The voters during these important early states went to the polls with out a complete comprehension of the intentions behind the campaign messages they'd been hearing, and the sources of funding for that political ads. As it turns out lots of the funders of the ads were coal and oil executives, land developers, and chemical company executives. It had been certainly their right to donate under the Supreme Court decision, but the voters needs to have been conscious that these industries have a lot to get by any loosening of environmental regulations, reductions in operation regulation, and/or lower government oversight.

[http://www.dontdrinktheteaparty.org mitt romney] - If the candidate is elected in 2012 and Super PACs helped, there will be obvious pressure to pay back such groups with favorable legislation, government support, or lower regulation? Once elected the state quickly needs to think about re-election. Again, these Super PACs appear to be largely a tool from the GOP - it is their right it should open them as much as some added scrutiny. People need to pay attention to the disclosures and stay conscious of this dynamic. And the government should pursue legislation that produces disclosure almost immediate.