Super PACs

It’s doubtful we will ever know what influence the so-called “Super PACs” had on the election.  Both ruling parties were heavily supported with Super PAC money so perhaps the impact was neutralized.  Politicians have a very low standing in this country and I am guessing that all the negative ads did little to enhance their reputation.

Although there were over 3,000 donors to Super PACs, the top 100 accounted for 80% of the total money spent; well over $100 million dollars.  The names of these individuals or organizations in the top 100 are yet to be disclosed.  These facts are well known.

It is also well known that the Supreme Court ruled all of this to be legal in the name of “free speech” as guaranteed by the Constitution, a controversial ruling, to say the least.

In my opinion, any organization or individual should be able to spend whatever they like to promote their agenda, ideas or beliefs.  We have a number of controversial issues in this country being decided by our elected representatives and supporting one position vs. another is part of our democratic system.

But ruling that Super PACs can support individual politicians is simply legalizing bribery.  This realization should trump the “free speech” argument every time.  Big money always comes with strings attached, ALWAYS!

The President of the United States, (along with members of Congress), is the primary “steward” of the taxpayers’ money.  If an individual or an organization can legally gain an advantage as to how the taxpayers’ money is spent, it will be to the detriment of those who can’t afford the bribes.

All too often we hear that in business, sports, religion etc. “it’s all about the money!”  And sadly we accept that rationale.  However, if there is one institution that should rise above it all, it is the Supreme Court.  Defending a Constitution established to protect the rights of every individual, not just those with the money to buy politicians.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

One response to “Super PACs

  1. Nothing trumps the first amendment — particularly with respect to “political speech.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s