Literature Review to Support and Oppose Thesis (Essay Sample)

Literature Review to Support and Oppose Thesis
Insert your name
Course
Professor’s name
Date due
Literature Review to Support and Oppose Thesis
Introduction
The Political Action Committee (PAC) tends to pool campaign from its members and fund with an aim of supporting the political candidates or used against the candidates, legislation, or the ballot initiatives. There have been several arguments concerning the role of PAC in the American political arena. Some people have argued that PAC should be abolished to make the elected officials be accountable to their constituents and reduce the ability of their dependence on donors. Other believes that the use of PAC tends to shape the political environment of the country. They believe that by providing the funds to support a particular candidate will enable the country to have credible and qualified members in the political arena. Politicians have viewed that the ability to spend funds on elections is a form exercising free speech. This exercise of financing the political environment with funds will raise corruption and alter the elected officials from performing their duties for their constituents. Overturning the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Citizens United Case and have the ability to enact legislation that bans Super Political Action Committees will allow the elected officials to be more accountable to their constituents and less to their donors.DiscussionThe Super PACs has been perceived to be a game for the wealthy while the middle-class have been pushed to the sidelines to watch as corruption increase while democracy falls. Since there are no limits set for the raising of money by the Super PACs, there are high chances that corruption will increase, and the rights of a common US citizen be abused. The Super PACs are not supposed to reveal their donors. This Act will increase the level of corruption in the country because the politicians may be involved in dirty projects with an aim of benefiting themselves rather than the public. It is more likely that the elected politicians will be involved in embezzling public resources to fund their political campaigns . This will make the elected officials desert their duties and responsibilities in their constituents. The argument in support of PACs use to finance the political agendas and candidates rely on the country’s constitution as exercising the rights of free speech while it is evident that this practice is depriving the citizens the right for better services from the elected officials.It is important that the spending by the Super PACs be regulated. This will allow the public to have faith in the politicians. It is viewed that the Super PACs only favor one political party in the political environment or during the election campaigns. The regulation or abolishment of the Super PACs will provide a transparent political environment and reduce the rate in which corruption is rising in the country. One of the most probable regulations that should be amended is the revealing of the participants in the committee. The donors’ identity should be revealed to gain the citizens’ trust. Failure to regulate will seem to encourage corruption and make the elected officials less concern about their constituents. This scenario will slow down or even destroy the development of the country, both economically and politically. The Super PACs have initiated attacks on other political candidates or legislation with no credible basis.Instead of the politicians to be involved in moving the country forward, they are actively participating in negative debates in the political environment. There are some who believe that the ability of Super PACs to raise money tend to alter the public participation of electing credible leaders. Corruption is evident in PACs activities, and there are high chances that corrupt leaders are elected. Despite the argument to overturn the Supreme Court ruling, there are some people who believe that the Super PACs have been able to enhance democracy in the country. The people supporting PAC believe that if the government suppresses PACs activities, then it is suppressing the exercise of free speech. The government should be able to support PACs activities because it enhances democracy. The pro PAC in the country believes that its activities do not hinder the accountability of the elected politicians. They believe that the elected politicians have their responsibility to take care of their constituents. The ability to remove donors support for the elected politicians will hinder the ability of the elected politicians to perform their duties and responsibilities efficiently.ConclusionThe involvement of PACs in funding politicians and legislation has raised a lot of concern to the public. Some people in the society believe that the action of the Supreme Court to support the actions of PAC will increase the level of corruption while reducing the democratic rights of the citizens. They believe that the ability to disclose those who are actively participating in the fundraising will increase the involvement of politicians in the country. Super PACs should be abolished or regulated to determine how the elected officials and politicians are accountable to their constituents. Some believe that PACs activity has enhanced democracy by encouraging excising free speech as required by the constitution.[Brown, Lyle C., Joyce A. Langenegger, Sonia R. García, Ted A. Lewis, and Robert E. Biles. Practicing Texas politics. 2014.] [Brill, Steven. America's bitter pill:...