Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Fokus dari penulisan karya tulis ini adalah untuk memperlihatkan peran Super PACs yang merupakan model komite atau organisasi pendanaan kampanye, dapat menimbulkan ketidaksetaraan politik antar warga, khususnya pada saat pemilihan presiden tahun 2012. Super PACs yang tidak memiliki batasan di dalam menerima serta membiayai kampanye dapat menjadi instrumen bagi pihak dengan dengan kekuatan ekonomi besar untuk mentransformasi kekuatan ekonominya menjadi kekuatan politik secara lebih leluasa. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif untuk menganalisa mengenai bagaimana Super PACs menimbulkan ketidaksetaraan politik antar warga pada Pemilihan Presiden Amerika Serikat Tahun 2012. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa pihak-pihak dengan kekuatan ekonomi kuat menggunakan Super PACs sebagai instrumen untuk mengubah kekuatan ekonominya menjadi kekuatan politik yang terlihat pada pendanaan Super PACs yang dimotori oleh kontribusi dana dari para pendonor besar. Namun penelitian ini juga menemukan bahwa Super PACs tidak dapat membeli pemilihan. Independensi dan kebebasan serta kekuatan agregatif politik dan ekonomi warga pada saat pemilihan, mampu untuk meminimalisir ketidaksetaraan akibat perbedaan kekuatan ekonomi dan politik.

---

This paper focuses on the role of Super PACs, which is a model of campaign finance committees, may lead to political inequality between the citizens, especially during the 2012 presidential election. Super PACs that do not have any restriction on receiving and funding a campaign can be an instrument for the people with a big economic power to transform their economic power into political power more freely. This study uses qualitative methods to analyze about how Super PACs pose political inequality between the citizens during The 2012 United States Presidential Election.

This study found that the people with a big economic power using Super PACs as an instrument to transform their economic power into political power, which can be seen by looking on how Super PACs funding, led by a big donors. However, this study also found that Super PACs couldn't buy the election. Independency and freedom, as well as political and economic power of the citizens aggregated in the election, able to minimize the inequality due to differences in economic and political power."

"Thanks to a series of recent US Supreme Court decisions, corporations can now spend unlimited sums to influence elections, Super PACs and dark money groups are flourishing, and wealthy individuals and special interests increasingly dominate American politics. Despite the overwhelming support of Americans to fix this broken system, serious efforts at reform have languished. Campaign finance is a highly intricate and complex area of the law, and the current system favors the incumbent politicians who oversee it. This illuminating book takes these hard realities as a starting point and offers realistic solutions to reform campaign finance. With contributions from more than a dozen leading scholars of election law, it should be read by anyone interested in reclaiming the promise of American democracy."

"Campaign finance reform has always been motivated by a definition of democracy that does not count corporations as citizens and holds that self-government works best by reducing political inequality. In the early years of the twentieth century, Congress recognized the strength of these principles by prohibiting corporations from making campaign contributions, passing a disclosure law, and setting limits on campaign expenditures. These reforms were not controversial at the time, but conservative opposition to them appeared in the 1970s. That opposition was well represented in the Supreme Court, which has rolled back reform by granting First Amendment rights to corporations and declaring the goal of reducing political inequality to be unconstitutional. Buying the Vote analyzes the rise and decline of campaign finance reform by tracking changes in the way presidential campaigns have been funded since the late nineteenth century, and changes in the debate over how to reform fundraising practices. A close examination of major Supreme Court decisions shows how the Court has fashioned a new and profoundly inegalitarian redefinition of American democracy"-- Provided by publisher."