Essay Sample on Citizen United: Unlimited Political Spending Power & SCOTUS Ruling

Introduction

Citizen United is a nonprofit organization that was founded in 1988 in the United States (Gilpatrick 2). The organization became famous in 2010 when it won a Supreme Court case in the United States in a situation that was referred to as Citizen United v. FEC. The ruling was made and stipulated that unions and corporations should be allowed to have unlimited political spending power in relation to the federal elections. The conservative political advocacy group is anchored in section 501 (c) 4 of the tax code within the constitution (Gilpatrick 23). The ruling by the Supreme Court has had profound impacts on the regulation of corporate political activities. The paper focuses on creating an argument paper that persuades the audience to join my cause on main citizens united and not corrupting America.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Although Citizens United is one of the most notorious rulings of our time, the American people make it a bigger problem than it should be. That being said, citizens united impacts America in many positive ways. Some of the positive ways that citizens united has affected its people include allowing and promoting the freedom of speech, thus enhancing democracy (Gilpatrick 27). Corporations should be allowed the freedom of speech and be allowed to campaign for their preferred presidential candidates. However, it should be done in a controlled manner since allowing such companies to fund political campaigns may lead to rent-seeking was the government had been formed by the individuals they spent money and time to campaign for.

The Supreme Court found no coercing government interests for restricting companies and corporations from using funds to make election-related expenditures. One of the benefits offered by the ruling and Citizen United is the fact that individuals from minority races, such as blacks, can lead and become president in the United States (Gilpatrick 16). For instance, during the election of President Barack Obama, many corporations funded and supported his campaigns, which made it possible for him to become the first black president. However, the courts should provide a clause that discourages such corporations from rent-seeking after the government has been formed (Yoder 10).

Congress should not make any law that abridges the freedom of speech or press. Therefore, the ruling of the Supreme Court regarding Citizen united helped citizens and corporations willing to support a specific candidate to do so without any restrictions. However, what the people of America do not know that citizens united is only a smaller factor and that there is a bigger issue that corrupts the process. Some of the other bigger issues that corrupt the election process include funding and influenced by other countries. For instance, during the 2016 presidential contest, it emerged that Russia was involved in influencing elections and campaigns in favor of Hillary Clinton (Teachout 5). Other issues that affect the electoral process include vote-rigging, as well as manipulating voters, especially by using their financial powers.

Besides some of the benefits offered by Citizen united, it also leads to a myriad of challenges within the country. Corruption during campaigns has always been a challenge in the United States for quite a long period (Dalton 16). However, with the introduction and implementation of Citizen united, there has been a reduced instance of corruption during political campaigns. Some of the various forms of corruption during political campaigns in the US include bribery and embezzlement. The Supreme Court ruled that nonprofit organizations, companies, and unions should spend during political campaigns because it does not give rise to corruption. However, spending by companies during political campaigns should not be done in a concert or in coordination with an individual's own campaign. Therefore, the Citizens united V. Federal election commission ruling dramatically reshaped the political landscape in the US and how elections are conducted in the country (Teachout 13). Citizen united also brought out the aspect of dark money, which refers to political spending by institutions and do not disclose their donors.

The Supreme Court gave institutions and companies the right to spend money during presidential campaigns. Many agree that with the unlimited corporate speech and that corporate having great wealth, they can easily corrupt the democratic process (Dalton 19). What many people do not know is that Citizens United is only a small factor, there are bigger issues that corrupt the process. Citizen United is perceived to corrupt the democratic process in many ways easily. For instance, private companies and corporations unleash hundreds of million dollars to support a particular presidential candidate (Yoder 54). The money donated by such companies and corporations is used to bribe people of influence to support a specific presidential candidate. It means that a few individuals buy the will of the people due to their financial capability. Citizen United disadvantage the majority of poor people whose voice is not heard since the big corporations use their financial might to overturn the will of the majority (Teachout 13).

The political action committees (PAC) have the responsibilities of pooling contributions from donors to support a particular candidate or campaign against the other. Both President Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton believe that Citizen united should be disbanded, and the Supreme Court decision overturned because it negatively impacts the democracy of the country.

Citizen United and the decisions of the Supreme Court should be overturned because allowing corporations to donate billions of dollars to their preferred presidential candidates weakens the economic growth of a country through rent-seeking as well as preventing people from exercising their democratic rights and obligations. When such corporations donate money for campaigns during presidential campaigns, once their preferred candidate is elected, they seek favors from the government in unprofessional ways, thus crippling the economy. Citizen united encourages rent-seeking where individuals and corporations spend a lot of money and time trying to get part of the national pie instead of contributing to the growth of the economy (Teachout 19). As a result, the country experiences slow economic growth. Besides, qualified people are denied the chance to get job opportunities by those corporations and individuals that were vibrant in financing the campaigns of the people in government.

Citizen united and money contributions during campaigns also lead to ineffective decisions and government policies. Important to note is the fact that corporations that fund political campaigns seek favors from the government in unorthodox ways. For instance, campaign donors exact pressure and coerce the government to implement only policies that favor them and their business at the expense of other individuals and corporations (Kerr 12). The corporations, for instance, coerce the government to eliminate their competitors, thus enhancing inequality and unfair treatment by the government.

Funding for political campaigns and increased lobbying from companies and corporations leads to undeserved favors from the government, such as reducing a company's effective tax rate. For instance, previous research indicates that some of the corporations that participate in campaigning for holders of political offices get tax reductions of approximately 1 percent (Kerr 17). As a result, other companies and corporations are unable to compete fairly, and in most instances, they die, thus leading to a declining economy. Both federal and state contracts are awarded to corporations that were used to fund the political campaigns and continue to dominate over other individuals and companies. Therefore, with the court rulings on the removal of restrictions and control of money in politics, rent-seekers will continue to get greater opportunities for exploiting the government by seeking special favors which is harmful to the economy (Gilpatrick 21). Citizen united and court decisions supporting corporations to fund political campaigns should be dealt away with because they lead to rent-seeking, which leads to wastage of resources. Besides, the regulations and policies that are sought out by rent-seekers lead to unequal and inefficient use of resources as well as causing resources to remain idle.

Conclusion

From the above-discussed points, I believe that the powers of Citizen united should be applied in the right way to ensure that individuals and corporations are allowed to exercise their right to speech and press. The ruling by the Supreme Court has had profound impacts on the regulation of corporate political activities. Although Citizens United is one of the most notorious rulings of our time, the American people make it a bigger problem than it should be. That being said, citizens united impacts America in many positive ways. Some of the positive ways that citizens united has impacted its people include allowing and promoting the freedom of speech, thus enhancing democracy. Corporations should be allowed the freedom of speech and be allowed to campaign for their preferred presidential candidates. One of the benefits offered by the ruling and Citizen United is the fact that individuals from minority races, such as the blacks, can lead and become president in the United States. However, Citizen united and money contributions during campaigns also lead to ineffective decisions and government policies. Important to note is the fact that corporations that fund political campaigns seek favors from the government in unorthodox ways.

Works Cited

Dalton, Russell J. Citizen politics in Western democracies: Public opinion and political parties in the United States, Great Britain, West Germany, and France. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House, 1988. Retrieved from

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=citizen+united+&btnG=#d=gs_cit&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3AB34tPA3HpWsJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D1%26hl%3Den

Gilpatrick, Breanne. "Removing Corporate Campaign Finance Restrictions in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 130 S. Ct. 876 (2010)." Harv. JL & Pub. Pol'y 34 (2011): 405. Retrieved from

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=citizen+united+v+federal+election+commission&oq=Citizen+United#d=gs_cit&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3A3A6lYowCZkgJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D5%26hl%3Den

Teachout, Zephyr. "Facts in Exile: Corruption and Abstraction in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission." Loy. U. Chi. LJ 42, (2010): 295. Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=citizen+united+v+federal+election+commission&oq=Citizen+United#d=gs_cit&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3Ana6z7rJ_DrwJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D1%26hl%3Den

Kerr, Robert L. "Naturalizing the Artificial Citizen: Repeating Lochner's Error in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission." Communication Law and Policy 15.4 (2010): 311-363. Retrieved from

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=citizen+united+v+federal+election+commission&oq=Citizen+United#d=gs_cit&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3A7295gzYablsJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D0%26hl%3Den

Yoder, Stephen A. "Legislative Intervention in Corporate Governance Is Not a Necessary Response to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission." JL & Com. 29, (2010): 1. Retrieved from

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=citizen+united+v+federal+election+commission&oq=Citizen+United#d=gs_cit&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3Ac-tawfOQm_cJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D6%26hl%3Den