Mathew Varghese

Exposition and Argument Section H5

Dr. Erin Kelly

11/1/216

Research Paper Proposal

            The topic I plan to talk about is campaign finance and how it causes the voice of the American people to be drowned out by the voices of private corporation. This will focus on the legal ways that companies utilize their freedom of speech to further the private interest of the few people at the top of the corporation.  This subject has a lot of groundwork in supreme court decisions and legislation and brings into question very controversial interpretations of our governmental documentations. My paper would explore why corporations need to reigned in from a logical point of view. However, it would also attempt to argue against corporate freedom of speech from with arguments that are constitutionally grounded in nature. The effects and necessities of the American people in a post conglomerate controlled economy would also be addressed. Ultimately My paper will argue against corporate power from multiple angles while promoting the power of the American constituency.

            The biggest impediment to my argument lie within the court cases of Citizens United vs. The Federal Elections Committee. And Buckley vs. Valeo. These cases defined money as a form of speech and allowed for corporate personhood. As a result, corporations can donate and spend their money in any manner that they want during an election. However, I aim to argue directly against the majority opinion of the Supreme Court in these instances. For example, the dissenting opinion of the supreme court in Citizens United case stated that a corporation is simply a social structure not a collective with every person representing a certain ideology and thus cannot be granted personhood. Also, it must be denoted that essentially all transactions that a corporations make are in order to make an investment. Similarly, donations in elections are made by these groups with expectations of policies that are favorable to the industry. This “political expression of speech” is just a payment in exchange for laws that allow for more profit. These investments into the political system must not be considered as free speech.

            Talking about Citizens United case also allows me to use the dissenting opinions of Supreme Court as spring board into other aspects of the campaign finance system that are also detrimental to democracy. However, it is important to start with Citizens United since it is the case that enabled most of the practices that I will mention. I want expand more upon on Super PAC’s and how it is far too easy for candidates to coordinate with them and use loopholes to get money allocated in unfair ways. I also want to talk about how the short terms of Congressmen, specifically Representatives, cause these government officials to stick close to the agendas of private interests in fear of losing funding during a primary or election. Another interesting topic to talk about would be the “revolving door” in Washington D.C. The revolving door is when politicians, after their career of public service become extremely well paid members of lobbying firms. This happens only when politicians enact policies that are favorable to that firm.  In these areas, I can utilize anecdotal evidence in combination with statistics to strengthen my argument against these practices. I can also contrast these points with some of the articles that advocate for complete deregulation.

Annotated Bibliography

Stiglitz, J. Rent Seeking and the Making of an Unequal Society. The New Humanities Reader. 5th ed. Stamford, CT: Cengage, 2015. 394-417. Print.

Stiglitz shows how corporations and the financial elite utilize their power to take money from the rest of society. He also mentions the use of lobbying as a strategy to persuade the government to make policies that favor the profitability of the company. This causes the government to prioritize the goals of corporations over the needs and wants of the American people. Here the voices of the Corporations drown out the voices of the general populous

Lethem, J. The Ecstasy of Plagiarism: A Plagiarism. The New Humanities Reader. 5th ed. Stamford, CT: Cengage, 2015. 210-234. Print.

Lethem talks about stratification of the creative world into elites and common people. Elites can draw inspiration from various sources yet once they attain copyright, they prevent the next generation of innovators from doing the same. In this culture, the protection of one’s expression limits the ability of other people.

Boyton, R. (2004, January 25). The Tyranny of Copyright? The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/25/magazine/the-tyranny-of-copyright.html?_r=0

This text was used in Lethem’s essay to further demonstrate the overly restrictive nature of copyright laws. It explains that copyright prevents many people in society from making significant studies and advances in specific areas. It says that the voices of the creators are valued over the voices of the common people.

Basu, K. (2011). Beyond the invisible hand: Groundwork for a new economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

This texts talks about free market economies and how the invisible hand and unrestricted economies do not lead to efficient markets. It also talks about how free market economists only show part of the image and never tell the whole story of how common people in the economic system are always cheated by conglomerates

Smith, A. and D. D. Raphael. The Wealth of Nations. New York: Knopf, 1991. Print.

This source promotes the idea of the invisible hand as something that will help guide the economy towards an efficient outcome. He explains that when all people are acting in their own self-interest, the entire system of all transactions are optimized.