McConnel Vs. Fec

McConnell vs. FEC

Problems/Causes that lead to the case:

The McConnell vs. FEC was brought to the United States Supreme Court attention through the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. (The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act is a United States federal law that amended the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which regulates the financing of political campaigns.)

The Constitutional Question:

The question raised in the court case was under the BCRA federal candidates and national party committees may not use soft-money funding (soft money is a c*+9ontribution to a political party that is not going to a particular candidate, thus avoiding various legal limitations) for federal election campaigns.

Supreme Court Majority Ruling/Opinion:

On December 10, 2003, the Supreme Court issued a ruling upholding the two principal features of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA): the control of soft money and the regulation of electioneering communications. I do agree with ruling b/c candidates use the media to bend the truth to gain votes.

Significance/Impact of Case:

The impact is the use of soft money is prohibited due to the lack of regulation it has. This entails there is less money given to candidates for them to advertise their campaigns.

How Case Relates to Assigned Topic:

The case is relative because advertising is a key way to reach constituents and to per sway them to vote in your favor. Also if your opponent has more funding, the exposure he/she may get can be the key to the defeat of the other