r aspect of white collar crime happens to be in the realm of governmental or political crime. For this purpose, governmental crime can be categorized by crime where there is personal, financial and/or political gain which is sought after. It is in this area where the argument to follow will be of interest. The topic I want to discuss is the argument of using “soft money” in political election campaigns. Let me start with a simple definition of what “soft money” is. According to a web site dedicated to informing the public about the inherent dangers with “soft money” as associated with politics… is simply defined as, money which by definition and law is not supposed to be part of the federal campaign finance system. Specifically, this means that it is illegal for corporations and labor unions to spend over certain amounts of money in connection with federal elections. For further explanation, since 1974 it has also been illegal for an individual to contribute more than $1000.00 to a federal candidate or more than $20000.00 per to a political party. In 1978 the Federal Election Commission made an administrative ruling which made it hazy as to what the definition of “soft money” actually was. And during the Dukakis and bush campaigns of 1988 both parties began to aggressively pursue soft money fundraising according to an independent research study of “soft money” web site. Apparently, the administrative ruling from the Federal Election Commission in 1978 created a loophole in the law. And since this “loophole” was created there has been an explosion of “soft money” fundraising. For example, in 1992 it was estimated that there was an estimated $86 million worth of “soft money” connected to the entire presidential election. In the 1996 election that number tripled to an incredible $260 million estimated “soft money” connection to that political year. It should be obvious that “soft money” is a growing problem and dare I say threat to our system and idea of “free” elections in the United States. I want to briefly discuss three aspects of “soft money” in financing political campaigns, and in that discussion touch on a United States Supreme Court opinion decided on December 10th of 2003 in McConnell Vs. The Federal Election Commission. The three aspects I want to discuss are: where “soft money” comes from, how it affects modern politics and law making, and finally, what can be done to stop “soft money” in federal campaigning.

The fact that “soft money” influences politics, the political process and law making in our country is really a moot point. The only real question is to what degree it influences the entire political process, and to what degree the average constituent or consumer is affected by this seemingly never ending flow of “soft money.” In our class we talk about law and society and “evolving standards of decency.” However, I believe that unless campaign finance is completely overhauled people will continue to see the manipulation of our government and its processes by corporations. The whole concept of “soft money” has cast a shadow over the very values we are teaching our children are unethical practices. Some of these values are that money can buy anything, and that wealth is the key to control. These are unethical beliefs, but under our current system of government, and under our current laws we do nothing but reinforce the idea that people can be bought, that power can be bought, but most dangerous of all… that justice and law can be bought. The problem with this whole mentality is that when our leaders accept this belief then we as a country begin down a slippery slope of further inequities and infringement of our freedoms. Maybe, if the populous as a whole understood what “soft money

Some topics in this essay:
Supreme Court, Election Commission, Free Searles, Senate Congress, Money Laundromat”, House Senate, George Bush, Reform Act, , “soft money”, Policy Introduction, federal election commission, election commission, federal election, supreme court, campaign finance, united supreme court, “iron triangle”, united supreme, “soft money” political, money” political, flow “soft money”, act 2002, flow “soft, finance reform act,