How The Election Process Is Rigged Term Paper

Voting rights in the U.S. has reached a critical stage as the Establishment becomes more concerned with the threat of outsider takeover. Recent years have seen everything from gerrymandering to heightened coordination among political elites (like Mitch McConnell), media Establishment leaders (like William Kristol), and business moguls (like Jeff Bezos) in an effort to control the voting outcomes of primaries (Ron Paul was blocked by the RNC in 2012 and in 2016 Trump's victories have been the rallying point for concern among these individuals). The voting rights law in the United States may at first seem simple but are in fact complicated by the rights of Super Pacs, delegates, and Super Delegates -- all of which combine to swing the political process to unjustly favor the outcome of the Establishment rather than of the voting populace. According to U.S. law, anyone who is 18 years of age and a citizen of the U.S. (maintaining the residency requirements of his/her state) can vote in an election. However, this does not mean that the individual's vote is actually counted or in any way impactful. Presidential elections are still the result of an electoral process and the nomination...

...

In the case of a contested convention, delegates who are hand-picked by political leaders can swing votes in a direction favored by the leaders, even if the popular vote backs a different candidate. This practice is essentially gerrymandering applied to the delegation (rather than to the boundaries of an electoral constituency) -- it is outright manipulation for the sake of tighter control by the ruling class or party.
The case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) (2010) highlights the manipulation in the campaign financing realm as well. The Supreme Court which heard the case found that the Constitution (1st Amendment) did not bar the government from placing restrictions on independent political financing by non-profits. In other words, unlimited spending by corporations, Super PACs and individuals on political candidates was now acceptable. Big Money could flood the electoral process and flood the system. For Citizens United, which wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton, it was a victory -- but it opened the door for unmitigated campaign spending and the concept of candidates being "bought off."

The injustice of voting rights in the U.S. is further…

Sources Used in Documents:

According to U.S. law, anyone who is 18 years of age and a citizen of the U.S. (maintaining the residency requirements of his/her state) can vote in an election. However, this does not mean that the individual's vote is actually counted or in any way impactful. Presidential elections are still the result of an electoral process and the nomination of candidates is a result of a delegate process; there is little direct impact from voters on the outcome. In the case of a contested convention, delegates who are hand-picked by political leaders can swing votes in a direction favored by the leaders, even if the popular vote backs a different candidate. This practice is essentially gerrymandering applied to the delegation (rather than to the boundaries of an electoral constituency) -- it is outright manipulation for the sake of tighter control by the ruling class or party.

The case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) (2010) highlights the manipulation in the campaign financing realm as well. The Supreme Court which heard the case found that the Constitution (1st Amendment) did not bar the government from placing restrictions on independent political financing by non-profits. In other words, unlimited spending by corporations, Super PACs and individuals on political candidates was now acceptable. Big Money could flood the electoral process and flood the system. For Citizens United, which wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton, it was a victory -- but it opened the door for unmitigated campaign spending and the concept of candidates being "bought off."

The injustice of voting rights in the U.S. is further exampled by the SCOTUS appointment, which is defined by Article Two of the U.S. Constitution: the POTUS nominates the Justice to the Supreme Court and the Senate confirms. Thus, Supreme Court justices are not elected at all but rather appointed. There is no voting by the public whatsoever. In a nation that touts itself as being democratic, any real actual democracy that could have an impact on something as important as who gets to sit on the Supreme Court is sorely lacking. And the fact that the Presidential election process is so heavily favored towards seeing that an Establishment power party favorite is nominated (except in the case of Trump, where the seemingly impossible -- i.e., the will of the people, has produced a popular outcome among voters) only shows that the entire process is controlled from the top down. Even the issue of midterm elections, which produce lower voter turnout than presidential elections illustrate the manner in which the process is stacked so as to take voting impact away from the populace and place it in the hands of the moneyed Establishment, which ensures that candidates bend to its will by the promise of campaign funds or the withholding of same. In terms of communication, it is money in the American political process that does all the talking.


Cite this Document:

"How The Election Process Is Rigged" (2016, June 05) Retrieved April 25, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/how-the-election-process-is-rigged-2160322

"How The Election Process Is Rigged" 05 June 2016. Web.25 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/how-the-election-process-is-rigged-2160322>

"How The Election Process Is Rigged", 05 June 2016, Accessed.25 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/how-the-election-process-is-rigged-2160322

Related Documents

Social Psychology in the News: Social Psychology Concepts Today, the world in general and the United States in particular are troubled places, with multiple crises confronting political leaders and citizens at every level, including most especially the ongoing Covid-19 virus pandemic, a weakened national economy, racial unrest and increasing polarization of the American electorate following the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. This dramatic polarization has been more severe than at

The incentives of engaging a meaningful and thorough campaign is thus reduced. The chances of influencing the results of elections are significantly reduced leading to the decrease in the level of voter turnout. The political campaigns are therefore less likely to devote resources towards the encouragement of voter turnout. The reduction in the level of competition leads to the candidate placing more efforts in the process of securing his

However, this calmness did not translate into crisis management success. Although BP seemed to not be significantly affected by the situation, Hayward stated that the company was overwhelmed by the media attention. The former CEO blames the press for the image that the public has formed on the company in response to its handling of the situation. The control that the company was supposed to reveal did not match the

On 15 March 2000, for instance, public rallies, demonstration and strikes were banned precisely at the moment when the 18-party opposition Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy (ARD) demanded national non-rigged elections. Some opposition leaders were arrested, and time and again in preceding and consequent year activists who sought democracy and opposition personnel were arrested on trumped up charges (Talbot, 2002). The first goal of any military regime in

Another view which is in fact closely linked to the above analysis is that the fall of communism began from within the system. This view is supported by the fact that that the very strict totalitarianism of the Soviet Union began to change after the death of Stalin. After Stalin's death the rigidity of Soviet Communism began to weaken, which was so to result in a reassertion of personal and

In this regard, throughout American history, the political pundits have argued about who was going to be the next president and why, but one of the foremost factors that has not been included in their analysis has been gender and race. Indeed, to date, it would have been completely accurate to predict that it was a foregone conclusion that the next president would be "a rich white guy." Today,