Party Favors: Evidence of Corruption in Party Campaign Spending Public Deposited

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_projects/8k71nj74p

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract or Summary
  • While discussing what types of campaign finance laws are and are not constitutional in his opinion in McCutcheon v. FEC, 572 U.S. ____ (2014), Chief Justice John Roberts stated that “those who govern should be the last people to help decide who should govern.” His intent was to highlight how any regulations that are not narrowly tailored to prevent the act or appearance of quid pro quo corruption, the exchange of an official act for money, do not represent a sufficiently compelling interest to justify infringing on 1st Amendment rights and thus are unconstitutional. But what if those who govern were deciding who should govern, not by enacting campaign finance restrictions on how individuals or PACs spend their funds, but through their own parties’ spending? The prototypical example of corruption is a member of Congress receiving funds and as a result making an official action that benefits the contributor. However, the opposite would also be considered corruption - members of Congress being rewarded after taking some sort of action. I will demonstrate that the way the two parties’ congressional campaign committees spend money is systematically driving who governs by favoring more ideologically extreme candidates. I will further argue that this could represent a compelling interest sufficient to enact further campaign finance restrictions.
Resource Type
Date Available
Date Copyright
Date Issued
Advisor
Committee Member
Academic Affiliation
Keyword
Rights Statement
Language
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Brent Steel (bsteel@oregonstate.edu) on 2014-05-21T16:26:39Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Brainerd_MPP_Essay.pdf: 4633880 bytes, checksum: 07ad4864109008d9d1b2d36a74ccecb5 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Deanne Bruner(deanne.bruner@oregonstate.edu) on 2014-05-21T17:42:38Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Brainerd_MPP_Essay.pdf: 4633880 bytes, checksum: 07ad4864109008d9d1b2d36a74ccecb5 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2014-05-21T17:42:39Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Brainerd_MPP_Essay.pdf: 4633880 bytes, checksum: 07ad4864109008d9d1b2d36a74ccecb5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-05-13

Relationships

In Administrative Set:
Last modified: 07/25/2017

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Citations:

EndNote | Zotero | Mendeley

Items