Provided below are my insight about the corruption in regards to corruption over money, and gerrymandering. I also touch on trustworthiness and morals in our government officials. I acknowledge my views may be different than someone else’s. I stand strongly and firmly back my beliefs with information provided and personal insight.
The document provides an overview of the Supreme Court’s ruling to not limit the amount of money an individual can pour into political groups. The issue arose that many anonymous donors were large to these political groups and there become a lack of transparency. President Obama stated that this new policy will, “open the flood gates to special interests,” (Obama,1) I agree with this statement and I feel like congress allowed for the wealthy to somewhat have more of a say in the political process than someone who has less money to donate.
I believe the ruling to limit donations was effective because the wealthy couldn’t sway political groups. I see the other side of the argument however. If companies or individuals want to put bunch of money into something their passionate about then they should be given the right to do …show more content…
The case was considered controversial and violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Miller v. Johnson is another cause of racial gerrymandering. (Wong, 1673) We should strive to make sure the representation of voters in each district is diverse. Too much of one race in a district can cause bias. I am aware, however, that absolute racial equality isn’t possible but the people drawing districts should try to make equality as close as possible. It is easy to see how officials would greedily draw the lines in their parties favor. We are unable to say wither they drew the lines randomly and it just happened to sway to their side, or if they drew it that way on purpose. This is why I believe the concept of gerrymandering is very
The document provides an overview of the Supreme Court’s ruling to not limit the amount of money an individual can pour into political groups. The issue arose that many anonymous donors were large to these political groups and there become a lack of transparency. President Obama stated that this new policy will, “open the flood gates to special interests,” (Obama,1) I agree with this statement and I feel like congress allowed for the wealthy to somewhat have more of a say in the political process than someone who has less money to donate.
I believe the ruling to limit donations was effective because the wealthy couldn’t sway political groups. I see the other side of the argument however. If companies or individuals want to put bunch of money into something their passionate about then they should be given the right to do …show more content…
The case was considered controversial and violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Miller v. Johnson is another cause of racial gerrymandering. (Wong, 1673) We should strive to make sure the representation of voters in each district is diverse. Too much of one race in a district can cause bias. I am aware, however, that absolute racial equality isn’t possible but the people drawing districts should try to make equality as close as possible. It is easy to see how officials would greedily draw the lines in their parties favor. We are unable to say wither they drew the lines randomly and it just happened to sway to their side, or if they drew it that way on purpose. This is why I believe the concept of gerrymandering is very