The debate on campaign finance policy that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission had reawakened in 2010 is not yet over in the United States. To strongly revive the longstanding question of the Campaign Finance Reform, already confined to the dimension of the myth, has been last April’s Supreme Court's decision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, a ruling likely to cause controversy, as pronounced at the very dawn of the opening of election campaigns for the upcoming mid-term elections, but especially on the eve of the 2016 Presidential campaign. McCutcheon v. FEC promises to deploy multiple effects in the long run, according to the author. Increasingly expensive election campaigns will require a greater commitment of senators and representatives in Washington to engage in fund-raising, taking away time from congress activities with important consequences on the functioning of the institutions.
Si riapre negli Stati Uniti il dibattito sul finanziamento delle campagne elettorali che la sentenza Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission aveva riacceso nel 2010. A riproporre prepotentemente l’annosa quaestio della Campaign Finance Reform, ormai relegata alla dimensione del mito1, è la decisione della Corte Suprema dello scorso 4 aprile nel caso McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission 572 U.S.2 Una sentenza destinata a far discutere, poiché licenziata all’alba dell’apertura delle campagne elettorali per le prossime elezioni di mid-term ,ma soprattutto alla vigilia della campagna per le presidenziali del 2016.La sentenza McCutcheon v. FEC , secondo l'autore, promette di dispiegare molteplici effetti nel lungo periodo. Campagne elettorali sempre più costose richiederanno un maggior impegno da parte di senatori e rappresentanti a Washington per dedicarsi al fund-raising, sottraendo loro tempo dalle attività congressuali con importanti ripercussioni sul funzionamento delle istituzioni.
Tra mito e realtà. Il finanziamento della politica negli Usa. Considerazioni a margine della sentenza Mccutcheon v. Federal election commission / ARAVANTINOU LEONIDI, Giulia. - In: NOMOS. - ISSN 2279-7238. - ELETTRONICO. - (2014), pp. 1-12.
Tra mito e realtà. Il finanziamento della politica negli Usa. Considerazioni a margine della sentenza Mccutcheon v. Federal election commission.
ARAVANTINOU LEONIDI, GIULIA
2014
Abstract
The debate on campaign finance policy that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission had reawakened in 2010 is not yet over in the United States. To strongly revive the longstanding question of the Campaign Finance Reform, already confined to the dimension of the myth, has been last April’s Supreme Court's decision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, a ruling likely to cause controversy, as pronounced at the very dawn of the opening of election campaigns for the upcoming mid-term elections, but especially on the eve of the 2016 Presidential campaign. McCutcheon v. FEC promises to deploy multiple effects in the long run, according to the author. Increasingly expensive election campaigns will require a greater commitment of senators and representatives in Washington to engage in fund-raising, taking away time from congress activities with important consequences on the functioning of the institutions.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
