NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... nother $ 100, 000 every fourth year, and $ 25, 000 in the years between. Benefits of this club include attending national and regional meetings with Republican leaders and an invitation to the party's annual ball (Manhood 82). Basically, those who contribute large sums of money to the political parties are given a chance to lobby for their own interests. Unfortunately, those interests rarely serve to benefit the average taxpayer... With another campaign season on the horizon, the issue of special interest groups and their donations to candidates and political parties is among the issues being addressed by three of the four main presidential candidates.
John McCain, Bill Bradley, and Vice President Al Gore are all advocates of campaign-finance reform. John McCain, in fact, has made limiting campaign contributions his main priority. However, he was recently asked the embarrassing question of why he wrote letters to various federal agencies supporting fifteen of his top campaign contributors. An article in the January 17, 2000 issue of TIME magazine entitled, "When Does Money Matter", investigates McCain's motives. The debate began over letters McCain wrote to the FCC asking to vote quickly on whether to allow Paxson Communications, one of the nation's largest broadcast companies and a major contributor to McCain's campaign, to acquire a license to a public television station in Pittsburgh.
Paxson has ownership in 72 stations and 51 affiliates that carry its programming. Pittsburgh is the only major city where it has no broadcast time. The FCC quickly replied to McCain's letter, telling him to stop interfering with the agency's business. In an effort to cover up for McCain's actions, his campaign team then canceled a Florida fundraiser sponsored by Paxson, and released several letters McCain had written as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee to agencies under the committee's jurisdiction. This was to show that McCain helped companies who didn't contribute to his campaign as well as those that did. McCain insists that he merely wanted to get a timely decision on the license, not necessarily an approval (Zagorin and Dickerson).
However, McCain's request was not the only thing he has done for Paxson. Last June he attempted to attach a provision to a telecommunications bill that would have made it easier for broadcast groups to own more than one TV station in the market. The provision was dropped. However, in August the FCC moved to allow many of the changes McCain wanted. As a result, Paxson's stock price jumped more than 30 % (Zagorin and Dickerson). Unfortunately, John McCain is not the only politician in this country who has been influenced by special interest groups.
In fact, similar stories of major campaign contributors receiving favors at the expense of the American public happen all the time. A simple provision attached to a seemingly harmless bill can cost taxpayers and businesses enormous amounts of money while a few large corporations collect big paychecks. An article in Time magazine entitled, "How The Little Guy Gets Crunched", explains the process. The article discusses how a bill called the District of Columbia Appropriations Act, which was passed near the end of 1999, was more than it appeared on the surface. The main focus of the bill was funding for education and promotions for the adoption of foster children. However, a single section of the bill entitled Superfund Recycling Equity, inserted by Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, relieved scrap-metal dealers of millions of dollars worth of potential liabilities at toxic-waste sites.
It is probably no coincidence that the scrap-metal dealers contributed more than $ 300, 000 dollars to political candidates and committees during the 1990 s. As a result of the bill, the liabilities were passed on to other businesses in the recycling industry (Barlett and Steele). The article goes on to claim that, "campaign spending in America has divided all of us into two groups: first- and second-class citizens. " In other words, campaign contributors and non-contributors. Some of the consequences of being a non-contributor include: paying a disproportionate amount of taxes; having to abide by laws that others do not; and paying taxes on necessities while others are allowed to write off entertainment costs.
Some perks of contributing to campaigns include: immunity from certain laws; extension on debt payments; the ability to kill legislation intended for the public good; and special government funding for certain business activities (Barlett and Steele). The outlook for the future does not look promising for working class citizens. During this year's election campaigning, companies will continue to write big paychecks to politicians and lobbyists in hopes of receiving big returns. For example, major pharmaceutical companies are seeking legislation to extend the patent life of their drugs. This could potentially protect $ 3 billion in sales for the drug companies. As a result citizens would pay higher prices for medication rather than being able to buy generic products (Barlett and Steele 50).
On the other hand, money donated to campaigns helps to finance ads and other political propaganda that helps to keep voters informed on where candidates stand on the issues. There are also many special interest groups that work to protect the rights of citizens and the environment. It is obvious that something needs to be done to weaken the influence of those interest groups receiving special favors while everyone else pays for it. However, the fact remains that nearly every politician receives money from special interest groups. Getting them to cut funding for their own campaigns is not going to be an easy task. In order to make politicians work more for the people and less for big industry, I believe more emphasis should be placed on live debates for campaigning.
Perhaps funding for these debates could come from both state and federal government funds. Coverage by the media would serve to keep citizens informed. This would also make winning an election less about money and more about ideas and issues. Also, further restrictions and regulations need to be placed on donations to candidates.
Details of campaign funding need to be made public, placing candidates' motives into view of the American public. Interest groups would still have the power to sway public opinion through use of the media, but less power to sway politicians directly. As a result, legislation would lean more toward the good of the people than the good of large corporations. A democracy should work for all citizens, not just the wealthy and powerful.
It is time that something be done to give the power back to the people. Bibliography:
Free research essays on topics related to: large corporations, class citizens, special interest groups, john mccain, political parties
Research essay sample on Special Interest Groups John Mccain
