Many people consider PACS as a source of corruption in the government, and a way for corporations to spread the web of their influence to Capitol Hill. However, Larry J. Sabato in the article “The Misplaced Obsession with PACS” detracts the notion of PACS as facilitators of corruption in order to dive deep into the murky waters of the political scene. By picking apart common criticism towards PACS, he starts to develop an argument that PACS are “acceptable to Madison’s Framework”. While he acknowledges the impact of PACS, he believe many other factors have more influence over the candidates choices. Through this article, Sabato attempts to tear down the misconception people have towards PACS In this intriguing article, Sabato first addresses many of the criticism held towards lacks providing more depth into …show more content…
This happens multiple times like when he puts forth an assertion that “people believe legislatures are looking for opportunities to exclaim ‘I’ve got larcey in my blood!’”’ and as mentioned before, he glosses over flaws in his argument, while embellishes the flaws in the criticisms towards PACS. However, this is all natural when dealing with an opinion based article. No writer will be unable to escape from putting biases in his piece because both sides, normally, will have flaws in them. That is why though there is some biases in this piece, it does take away from the message that he is trying to convey when he mentions the multiple reasons why PACS are not as influential as we think. Whether it be that “party loyalty has a stronger pull” or the fact that individuals contribute more than PACS both are reasonable points that he provides logical explanations to and uses rhetorical questions. While these are assertions with no complete evidence to support them, it still upholds his points as they appeal to the common sense of the