Dear Mr.

President [Outline]
Thesis: Politics revolves around money. It stifles the voice of the
people.

I.

Preamble - Founding Principles

A. Greed and selfishness are two of humanitys flaws. They
have caused wars and grief at the cost of ordinary people.
B. Deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed
That they are endowed, by their creator, with certain
Unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty,
And the pursuit of Happiness.
C. Currently, politics revolves around money and this stifles
the voice of the people. The very people who the
government should be working for.

II. List of Complaints - Commentary Analysis

A. Money is what moves things and as 1% of the population
owns 40% of the wealth, power is monopolized.
B. Letting corporations represent their companys interests,
not individuals, is a form of democracy.

III. Stirring

Conclusion - And for the support of this Declaration, with

a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to

each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. - DOI

A. People make up this country and theyre the ones being

governed not money. Their voices are the ones that should
matter. It shouldnt be the money talking.
B. I hope that politicians represent their peoples interests
not their sponsors, or at least not let it be stifled out.
C. Already, citizens are disgruntled by the way they feel
they are represented in their government. If the ordinary
people stop being listened to at all and instead it is the
wealthy few and corporates that are represented, the USA

will stop being a leader on this earth. Itll also give

its citizens the right to be angry and revolt.
D. Every citizens voice matters. The government is betraying
their country if it is stifled.

List of Complaints
Name: Udeema Shakya

Topic:
Lobbying
Money in government and its result of taking the voice away from the
people
Links:
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/report/2014/05/02/
88917/how-campaign-contributions-and-lobbying-can-lead-to-inefficient-ec
onomic-policy/
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/
http://journalistsresource.org/studies/politics/finance-lobbying/influence-i
nterest-groups-public-policy-outcomes
http://www.businessinsider.com/inequality-in-the-us-is-much-more-extrem
e-than-you-think-2015-6
https://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/10/18/11527/citizens-united-decision-and-wh
y-it-matters

Quotes:
policy changes in response to money in politics
It gave corporations and unions the green light to spend unlimited

sums on ads and other political tools, calling for the election or
defeat of individual candidates.
Wealth distribution chart
Lobbying expenses chart

Paragraph:
This government is supposed have been made by the people and for the people.
Thats not what it seems to be like now. When passing laws and policies there are a variety

of factors that go into it and money is a big one. Money is power. Thats a fact. The more
money you have, the more opportunities you have to influence big decisions. As of 2011
1% of americans owned 40% of this countrys wealth and the top 20% owned 97% of the
wealth according to a study done by Professor Mike Norton and economist Dan Ariely. To
me that is brutally unfair in terms of having a voice in todays government.
Every citizens voice should matter. As they live here, shouldnt they be an expert in
their living conditions and the policies that would benefit them? Yet, according to Center
for American Progress, policy changes in response to money in politics. I dont have the
kind of money that would sway anyone to join my cause so, does that mean that my voice
doesnt matter? That even if the public banded together to protest, they would be ignored if
they didnt have the money to back them?
The supreme court ruling on the FEC vs. Citizens United gave corporations and
unions the green light to spend unlimited sums on ads and other political tools, calling for
the election or defeat of individual candidates, as so nicely explained by The Center for
Public Integrity. I dont necessarily have a problem with corporations donating reasonable
sums of money to campaigns because I know they cost a lot. My problem is that there is no
limit. Corporations dont donate to campaigns or super PACS because they want to be
friends with everyone no, they donate because theyre looking out for their own interests
and agendas. With this ruling, there is no limit to the amount of advertising that can be
bought for campaigns which means there is no limit to the amount of propaganda that can
be shoved down my throat. How are voters expected to make informed decisions when
things all around them are showing them twisted truths if not outright lying? Letting
corporations dictate what politicians stand for takes the voters voice away from them by
not being honest and transparent.