Big donors try to sway the outcome of our elections by giving to the candidates they like. In theory, we have limits on their donations so that no one person has too much influence (that wouldn’t be very democratic would it?). But in reality, the “limit” is so high that the only people worrying about it already have far more influence than the average American:
There are a lot of reasons to be furious about this:
- The average American household can’t come close to the political power of a major donor – even if they gave away their entire income twice over.
- The “limit” does nothing to restrict those donors’ outsize influence.
- The fact that Washington is worrying about that limit – and whether it’s too high or too low – tells you how amazingly out of touch they are with the American people.
But it gets worse
In 2010, you might remember, the Supreme Court decided a case, Citizens United, which allowed unions, special interest groups, and corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money in elections (as long as they didn’t give directly to candidates), and thereby giving them unlimited influence over the outcome.
Now, in 2013, some of the same players are suing again (in McCutcheon v. FEC). This time, they want to raise political contribution limit for individuals to an unprecedented level:
If you were mad already, think of how much worse this will make things. Are you mad enough to do something about it? Then click here to help stop corruption in American politics.
(Read more about the McCutcheon case here.)