Democracy is “a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections” according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

At the most basic level, this means that government is by and for the people.

Also, it’s important to note that it is for all the people. It doesn’t matter what social or economic class someone is from. Race and gender don’t affect the ability to be apart of a democracy either.

Everyone is represented. Any citizen over the age of 18 can vote in America except felons.

Participation by the majority, the average people, is crucial in maintaining a successful and proper democracy.

But what happens when the majority no longer controls elections? Can our country still be considered a democracy?

I think that the answer is no. America is no longer a true democracy if Super PACs are legal.

A PAC is a political action committee, or an organization that campaigns for or against candidates.

That definition makes PACs sound harmless. But they are extremely powerful because they can raise unlimited contributions for a candidate.

Since PACs are technically independent from candidates and are considered corporations, they can have this ability.

So far, this may not sound like a threat to democracy. We have to dig a bit deeper to show how unfair it is.

Super PACs raise millions of dollars. Do you think that they do this by going to every average person in America and asking for a small donation?

No. That would take forever. People who can donate thousands or even millions of dollars are the ones that donate.

That money buys influence. Think of it this way – if somebody is offering you $10,000 to vote yes on a bill, would you do it?

This is basically how PACs work. They raise money for candidates and then tell the candidates what they want to see.

A candidate isn’t going to vote against what his or her supporters want because that would quickly end the contributions. And where would candidates be without money?

A candidate wouldn’t be able to travel, hold forums, put out advertisements, or do any campaigning without money. Thus, PACs seem necessary.

The solution must be to find a way around this. Outlawing contributions completely would be impractical because candidates do need money. But shutting average people out of elections and government isn’t acceptable either.

With the way elections and government work right now, average people have no say. Yes, they can still vote. But they can’t directly influence a candidate.

Also, the average person may be influenced to vote for a candidate by ads that were provided by the money from Super PACs. The extent of influence that PACs have is scary.

Limits on contributions need to be set in order to return the supreme power to those it rightfully belongs to.

We need to bring democracy back to the people. PACs do not accurately represent the majority of people in our country. So why should they get the majority of influence?

Mariah Pulver is a sophomore journalism and political science major from Tucson, Ariz.