McCUTCHEON and Citizens United Decisions Essay

Our experienced writers will achieve maximum points awarded on this assignment. Order with us today!

Topic:How the Supreme Court decision\’s McCutheon and Citizens\’s
United will increase social inequity in the United States and damage
Order Number:2875
Details:This is all I have to go on despite repeatedly requesting more
information. Copy and pasted from the three places he describes this
assignment. Any questions please feel free to contact me. Just look at
as a sociologist and that should be fine thanks so much. Since this
course is designated writing intensive, a short 5-8 page research
paper is required (Five full pages of text minimum- this doesn’t
include the cover page or the reference or bibliography page(s)). You
must choose a controversial subject of social interest and take a
position on it. Your position should be clearly stated in the first
paragraph of your paper. You will need to clear the topic with me
before the end of the third week of class…You must include a
bibliography of at least 6 sources, 3 of which must be primary
sources. The paper is to be double spaced, with 1† margins, and use
a standard 12 point font. Check in the caveats as to the college and
my position on plagiarism. Your research project will be a position
paper with no fewer than five (5) full pages of text, Standard 12 font
and 1 inch margins are required and a bibliography of no fewer than
six (6) sources, of which 3 must be primary sources.. You can not
include encyclopedias-including wikapedia as source material. You must
choose a topic of sociological interest, take a position on it and
defend that position. As for the position paper. Don’t just go by
the minimum required. Explore, expand into depth in the subject
matter. Make sure that your primary sources are from sociology And not
other disciplines and are recent. Do your analysis as completely as
possible and back up your material with specific cited sources in the
body of the paper.

Here’s  a brief introduction of the paper.

The precedents in the McCutcheon vs. Federal Elections Commission (FEC) and Citizens United vs. FEC show that the influx of money in politics causes social and political inequalities, and promotes systemic corruption rather than democracy. The disparity between the rich and poor in political participation is one of the most documented aspects of political inequalities. Studies of participatory inequality are mostly inspired by the presumption that political participation carries crucial consequences for representation. Verba et al., (1995) note that inequalities in political participation are greatly linked to government responsiveness. However, the thought has not been thoroughly explored by political scientists. Meanwhile, statistical studies that can be traced back to the classic analyses of Miller & Stokes (1963) have established a strong relationship between citizens’ political preferences and their representative’s responsiveness. On the same note, this paper will provide a more nuanced spectrum of political representation between the rich and the average in the society under the lens of recent changes in policies namely, McCutcheon Case, and Citizens United case.

McCutheon Case Explained

                 On 2nd April 2014, the Supreme Court announced a ruling on the controversial McCutcheon v. FEC case. The ruling sought to strike down aggregate limits for the amount one may contribute in a two-year period for federal candidates, political action committees, and political parties. Through a vote of 5-4, the court had ruled the biennial aggregate limits as unconstitutional, citing the First Amendment. The McCutcheon case imposed separate limits on the aggregate figure that individuals may be allowed to contribute. Under the limits that were effected in 2011 through December 2012, an individual would contribute up to $ 2, 500 to federal candidates per election, $30,000 in a calendar for a national party committee, and a maximum limit of 5, 000 in a year to a non-party political committee ( Additionally, the act sustained the aggregate amount an individual may contribute within a 2-year year period. Under the limits established in January 2011 through December 2012, a single person would not be allowed to contribute more than $46, 200 to federal candidates, and no figure exceeding $70, 800 to federal party committees and political action committees. Summing up the figures, an individual could only contribute up to $117, 000 in a biennial period (Liptak, 2014).

In reaction to the limits, an Alabama top businessman Mr. Shaun McCutcheon felt that the limits were low and he wanted to contribute more. He filed a petition against the FEC to challenge both the $46, 200 and $70, 800 claiming that the limits violated the First Amendment.  During the decision, the court allowed even more money into an already saturated political process.  The court ruled to burr the government from preventing citizens from offering contributions to as many political parties and candidates as possible as previously capped by the “aggregate limit” rule. However, this does not mean that donors and corporates can give as much money as they wish; the Supreme Court sustained the base limits. The maximum amount a single individual may donate to a candidate is $2600 and while the maximum to a national party committee is $32400. However, the ruling still increased the money that could be contributed to the campaign process: the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the Republican National Committee, and the National Republican Congressional Committee constituted a super-sized fundraising committee that allowed up to $97, 200 per year per donor (Liptak, 2014).

find the cost of your paper