Running Head: MONEY IN POLITICS 1

Marco Mejia

November 5, 2017

Community Problem Report

Money in Politics

The University of Texas in El Paso

MONEY IN POLITICS 2

In 2009, the supreme court ruled that politicians can receive unlimited amounts of money

without regulation. The ruling was defended by claiming that government interference into

individual donations was a violation of the first amendment (Citizens United v. FEC, 2009). While

individual contributions are acceptable. A problem arises when the politicians decide to ignore

their constituents, to provide for their donors. For example, after massive shootings, like the one

in Las Vegas, politicians refuse to speak up about gun control. According to the New York Times,

the majority of politicians that reject the notion that America needs gun control, are also recipients

of a donation from the NRA. Instead of representing the American people, politicians decide to

serve their wallets. Money in politics is a non-partisan issue; as seen in figure 2, even democratic

politicians refuse to represent the American people. No single figure could ever represent the

American people; however, when America faces a mass shooting every month, it is clear we need

gun control now. The problem arises with money in politics when politicians refuse to displease

their donors, out of fear of losing funding. Once a politician loses their funding, their donors will

merely fund another candidate willing to sell out. So, the solution is clear, America must call on

the supreme court to put an end to Citizens United v. FEC, 2009. If the supreme court refuses to

listen to the people, then America should only decide to vote for politicians that do not take Super

PAC money.

The nature of money in politics is simple; politicians are ignoring the American people. In

an interview with Politico, John Boehner said that senator Chaffetz had no interest in representing

the American public. In the interview Boehner stated, Chaffetz only wanted to protect his self-

interest, he just made moves that insured his finical earnings would remain protected, over the

American people (Politico). The exact issue is that politicians are refusing to protect the American

public. While Boehner knew that Chaffetz did not have the best interest of the American people,
MONEY IN POLITICS 3

he only chose to call him out, after he left the political realm. Just after he had enough money to

retire to cover his own ass. This type of problem can only be described as a finical dictatorship.

Politicians are blackmailed into representing the interest of their super PAC. Money in Politics is

an economic issue that affects the type of legislation that governs the United States of America.

We see money in politics first influence the American election system, by allowing cooperation to

purchase politicians. Then when politicians are elected, the rich tell politicians which laws to

introduce and which laws to vote in favor of. The cycle is then repeated once enough politicians

are purchased to where all government is corrupted, and incapable of regulating itself through the

checks and balances.

Money in Politics is a bad thing that negatively affects every American. In a speech by

TYTS Cenk Uyger, he explained, the people cannot purchase sex from a prostitute. If a low-

income man were to be caught buying the services of a prostitute, that that man would be arrested.

The man in question would not be able to rationalize that he was just talking to the prostitute. The

man in question would not be allowed to rationalize that he was merely exercising his freedom of

speech. That man in question could not say we were just talking, and be released from the

custody of the police. In the speech, Cenk Uyger explained that the ruling declaring Super PACS

a freedom of speech would be similar to legalized prostitution. However, instead of politicians

selling their own bodies, they are selling out the bodies of the American people (TYT POLITICS).

This is unfair because the people will earn zero percent of the profit. No regulation of Super PAC

is a grave issue because without supervision the American people will always be ignored. This

affects all Americans regardless of political ideology. According to Open Figures, an online

database of donation made to politicians, it is made apparent that all Super PACs donations are

made to both political parties with a large sum of money (Figure 1). When all most every non-bias
MONEY IN POLITICS 4

and accredited sources show that almost every politician takes in large amounts of money from

Super PAC; money in politics is a serious issue. Therefore, all Americans need to take actions or

be ignored by their own representative. However, there will be cost to pay as a result of being

heard. Politicians could merely pass legislation declaring that all financial donations made by

Super PACs become private information. Not only that but there could government retaliation, to

protest and demonstrations as we have seen in the past, like the shooting at Kent University. Not

only this, but politicians could use the political hostility between the country to once again polarize

the people from uniting, or claim there are more important issues for them to tackle.

Action needs to be taken to remove Super PACs in the United States elections process.

This is a fight not only for the American people but also any politicians that represent the people.

If a politicians only source of campaign finance is a single cooperation, then most likely that

politician should not be the representation of the people. Politicians that do not have the trust of

the American public, nor do not energize the public to take an active part in politics, do not need

to become representatives for the public. Becoming a representative for any role in American

government should not be award to just anyone. Politicians should have to earn their role like

everyone else. To become a student at any university, a student must prove they are worthy. While

some students are admitted because they can purchase their way into college, the successful

students earn their spots in university. If a youthful high school student is not given any privileges,

neither should politicians. Politicians like Bernie Sander ran a campaign without Super PAC

money, in the presidential election (Bernie Sanders: Guide to Political Revolution). While Bernie

did lose the primaries, Sanders did manage to shake up the biggest finical funded campaign in

United States History. Hilary Clinton, herself, even claimed that Bernie Sanders was one of the

main reason as to why she lost the 2016 Presidential Election, in her book What Happened?. If
MONEY IN POLITICS 5

a politician cannot excite the American public or even earn their trust, why should they be

permitted to be a representative? More politicians should take a stand to not only gain the

confidence of their voters but also to protect free democratic elections. If politicians refuse to act

against money in politics, the American public should vote them out. America would need to unite,

that way the majority of the people can be heard. As compared to the majority of the top political

donors of politicians. As stated in an article by CNN, the top one percent can account for forty

percent of all political donations made to either a Super PAC or directly to politicians

(Schmitt, M.). These sources are clear indication that money is present in our election cycle. If

any American were to believe still that politicians to feel a strong loyalty to their donors or at least

their legalized bribes, then they are precious but also nave. Because we can see that politicians

like Bernie Sanders do need Super PACs to succeed. The fact that a no named senator could

undermine a politician that was bolstered by the media daily should be enough influence for all

Americans to realize the need to end unregulated Super PACs.

Money in politics is serious issues that need to be addressed by the supreme court.

Unfortunately, when America's representatives refuse to listen, it is up to the American people

makes a difference. Money in politics is a non-partisan issues that effects very single Americans.

The people need to introduce regulatory laws of political donations starting at the local

government, state, and finally national government. America deserves to be heard by their

governments, so it is time for them to speak up.

MONEY IN POLITICS 6

Graphs and Figures

Figure 1: Open Secrets Figures

Figure 2: NY Times
MONEY IN POLITICS 7

Annotated Biography

Alberta, T., Shafer, J., Greenfield, J., & Law, A. O. (n.d.). John Boehner Unchained. Retrieved

November 02, 2017, from https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/29/john-

boehner-trump-house-republican-party-retirement-profile-feature-215741

In an interview with Politico, John Boehner, the former Republican Speaker of the House",

speaks about his time in the political field. His rhetoric is mostly turbulent, like when he said

he enjoyed watching the government fall apart while thinking to himself that's not his

problem. But also in the interview, he calls out a Republican senator Chaffetz, saying he was

not interested in representing the American People; and that Chaffetz was only interested in

passing legislation in his self-interest. Thus, admitting that politicians only act under the

direction of their "Super PACs."

Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission 08-1953. (2009). Retrieved from Federal

Election Commission

The following legal document states that since freedom of speech by the first amendment does

not address directly in the Bill of Right and Constitution, the Supreme Court will decide the

constitutionality of the Money in Politics. The supreme court claims that regulation of

money in politics can be interpreted as political suppression, and grant Super PACs

unregulated political donations. Also, grants cooperation to be considered human beings, not

to be censored.
MONEY IN POLITICS 8

David Leonhardt, Ian Prasad Philbrick And Stuart A. Thompson. (2017, October 04). The

Congress Members Receiving the Most N.R.A. Funding. Retrieved November 02, 2017,

from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/04/opinion/thoughts-prayers-nra-

funding-senators.html

"NY Times" provided a graph of the largest donor recipients of the NRA, alongside the tweets

they posted in response to the Los Vegas Shooting. NY Times also calls the hypocrisy of

how the Senators state, "there was nothing we could do to prevent this." However, never

considering gun control as a probable solution. Conveniently, every single politician on this

list is also against gun control.

Sanders, B., & Buffum, J. (2017). Bernie Sanders: Guide to Political Revolution. New York,

NY: Henry Holt and Company.

"Bernie Sanders: Guide to Political Revolution" is a novel written by a US senator, Bernie

Sanders. The book is a non-traditional persuasive piece that encourages progressive youth to

mobilize and resist against discriminations and unjust laws. In the novel, Bernie Sanders

claims that Super PACs have more control of politicians than their actual constituents.

However, American Democracy should be representative of all Americans regardless of

their financial income. Therefore, Bernie Sanders encourages youth to vote for politicians

that listen to the people and the money. Also, Bernie Sanders did not take Super PAC

money, and managed to run a campaign successful enough to introduce himself to the entire

American people.
MONEY IN POLITICS 9

Schmitt, M. (2015, February 16). Money's power in politics: Give everyone a share. Retrieved

November 02, 2017, from http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/16/opinion/schmitt-politics-

money/index.html

The article by CNN talks about money in politics. In the piece, we can see quotations from

Michelle Obama asking her audience to "cut her the best check so they all can be active in

politics.". The article talks about the necessity to have money in politics to launch a political

platform. While also addressing that the top 1% of Americans do in fact contribute 40% of

all donations made into politics.

The Center for Responsive Politics. (n.d.). Retrieved November 02, 2017, from

https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/summ.php?disp=D

The graph from "Open Secrets," shows the top individual contribution made to the political

parties. The information shows that the majority of donations are not non-partisan. And

typically, are funded directly into the Democratic and Republican party. It is not the legal

responsibility of individual Americans to regulate the election cycles. However, it is the

American government to provide fair and just elections so that the people can elect the

collectively preferred candidate.

MONEY IN POLITICS 10

[TYT POLITICS]. (2016, February 6). Cenk's Rousing Speech on Getting Money Out of

Politics. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRCm3LVNZrs

Cenk Uyger, the founder of TYT, a progressive speaks about Money in Politics at "The

Progressive Sister Giant Conference." In this speech, he talks about the supreme court ruling

declaring that the unregulated contribution of money to politicians, is freedom of speech.

However, any man is caught purchasing the services of a prostitute, then they cannot claim

"we were just talking" and will be arrested for prostitution. Therefore, if a company is

caught purchasing the complacency of any United States elected officials, they should not be

pardon.