Discussion Assignment
Corporation Influence on Elections
You have been elected to the U.S. Congress. Congress is considering whether to regulate the influence of corporations on elections and the law-making process due to lobbying and especially since court decisions such as Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 130 S.Ct. 876 (2010).
- For your initial response, prepare an explanation of whether you support such regulation and explain why by incorporating course concepts.
- Take any position you want.
- Post a reply to at least one student you agree with, and post a reply to at least one student you disagree with.
- You must include new information in your replies to further the discussion.
- Doing more than the minimum will enhance your grade.
- All posts are to be substantial, incorporate course concepts, and relate to the discussion issue.
- You might also want to conduct some independent research to enhance your posts.
- Use 250-300 words when doing the Discussion Assignment
*(The discussion assignment is due today at 11:59pm ET So start this immediately)
Peer responses
Respond to two students. Use 150-200 words when responding to students, Start off with (“hello Name”).
(The Students have not posted their assignments yet, when they do I will give them to you so they can reply to them.)
Week 1 Assignment: Case Study
- Select one of the case study topics listed here Select one of the case study topics listed here – Alternative Formats and conduct quality research using resources available from the New England College library or from other sources, including quality online resources (not Wikipedia), books, journals, court decisions, interviews, etc. Don’t forget to use your text.
- Analyze the situation posed for your case study
- Introduce your topic, and define the problem you will be solving
- Divide your case study into appropriate subsections based on the readings in your text and your independent research, including:
- Background information
- Subsections specifically related to your topic
- Problem solutions or decisions
- Include useful charts and other graphics if they add to your case study
- Summarize your case study by preparing a conclusion
And these are the students you have to respond to:AmyThe Citizens United victory essentially granted first amendment
rights (free speech) to corporations. I would support regulations to
limit corporate political campaigning in such a way that would shine the
light of truth on the special interests in political campaigns. Rather
than just opening corporate political donations carte blanche, I would
vote to tax all political donations above a certain threshold, and
require extensive disclosure of any sponsorship of an advertisement. All
funds collected as a result of the election tax could be directed fund
voting programs that fight gerrymandering and other voter
manipulations. Corporations are necessary to the economy, which we all rely upon to
maintain a comfortable lifestyle. That comfortable lifestyle however
is now unbalanced. Since The Great Recession in 2008, and now COVID-19,
our economy has been reeling from unscrupulous corporate management and
their political sponsorship. Since declaring that these businesses
were “too big to fail”, we are essentially allowing corporations the
ability to continue on without recourse, and the income gap is becoming
ever-wider. Americans are already bombarded by special interest groups’
political messages and lobbying efforts. By allowing corporations to
publicly advertise their positions, it might bring public awareness to
certain corporate – political agendas, and provide badly needed funds to
help create more voter opportunities, provided the funds are managed
ethically. In my opinion, the public should consider all political campaigns
with an attitude of Caveat emptor. Politicians are trying to sell you
something, and the buyer should beware of their motivations. TImothyAs a member of Congress, I do not support additional regulations on
elections and the law-making process. The Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 130
S.Ct. 876 (2010) is clear that such regulations are an infringement on
our First Amendment rights of free speech. Some may want to argue that
corporations are not individuals, and therefore should not receive the
same constitutional protections as individual citizens. News
organizations have long claimed protection under the First Amendment.
They are no different than any other corporation, even though they may
have a different product, newspapers vs. automobiles (for example), but
this does mean they should receive special treatment. In the eyes of
the law, all corporations should be treated equally. Freedom
of speech should mean freedom of speech for all. If we start to
regulate speech from certain corporations and not others, where do we
draw the line? Furthermore, who gets to decide which corporations are
restricted. It is not the job of Congress to decide and regulate such
things. One
outcome from the supreme court decision is the formation and continued
expansion of so-called SuperPACs. I don’t think there is anyone who
enjoys all of the extra political commercials during elections.
However, I think the important point is that this is allowed and we
continue to allow it. Just because people do not like something, or do
not agree with something, does not mean we should be suppressing freedom
of speech. Often
times the truth and accuracy of these political messages are called
into question. Again, we may not agree with what is being said, but
that does not mean that speech is unconstitutional. We already have
laws to protect against libel and slander. Remember to : Post a reply to at least one student you agree with, and post a reply to at least one student you disagree withYou must include new information in your replies to further the discussionuse 150-200 words when responding to each student
0 comments