This critique of an editorial on USA Today, is about having to disclose donors on Super PAC ads. There seem to be a large amount of money that is donated to help with campaigns. In which, of course, help win elections. This, whole editorial is saying to me is that , if you have enough money you have an edge over everyone else that is running against you. I feel like of course you need money to have a successful campaign. But, I also feel like the other people who may have less amount of money should have a good chance of winning also. I do see the points about the amounts that have been donated to keep an campaign alive as you will see when you read the article, but the whole idea of having every donor on ads saying" I approve this message" is unnecessary. Yes, we do have a right to see who and how much someone is donating, The question is Do we do this to everyone who donates in whole world? I feel its not that fair if we just discriminate to the presidential candidates, but what about other organizations who also receive large lump sum of money that has been donated. We as a people only care about things that of course impact us. When we make decisions we don't think about others and what actually makes a difference. Plus, I don't think having disclose donors on Super PAC ads will make a difference in anything. Everything will still run the same and there will still be a "bidding war" in every campaign. I would say I do not agree with this editorial. It is a useless thing to do. I feel we need concentrate on things that will make a difference and stop worrying about things that doesn't matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment