Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiMother's Milk of Politics Turns Sour
Once again we're closing the barn door after the horse is out and gone. In Washington, the Federal Reserve has finally acted to stop some of the predatory lending that exploited people's need for money. And like Rip Van Winkle, Congress is finally waking up from a long doze under the warm sun of laissez faire economics. That's French for turning off the alarm until the burglars have made their getaway.
Philosophy is one reason we do this to ourselves; when you worship market forces as if they were the gods of Olympus, then the gods can do no wrong -- until, of course, they prove to be human. Then we realize we should have listened to our inner agnostic and not been so reverent in the first place.
But we also get into these terrible dilemmas -- where the big guys step all over everyone else and the victims are required to pay the hospital bills -- because we refuse to recognize the connection between money and politics. This is the great denial in democracy that may ultimately mean our ruin. We just don't seem able to see or accept the fact that money drives policy. It's no wonder that Congress and the White House have been looking the other way as the predators picked the pockets of unsuspecting debtors. Mega banking and investment firms have been some of the biggest providers of the cash vital to keeping incumbents in office. There isn't much appetite for biting -- or regulating -- the manicured hand that feeds them.
Guess who gave the most money to candidates in this 2007-08 federal election cycle? That's right, the financial services and real estate industries. They stuffed nearly $250 million dollars into the candidate coffers. The about-to-be-bailed-out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together are responsible for about half the country's $12 trillion mortgage debt. Lisa Lerer of Politico.com reports that over the past decade, the two financial giants with the down home names have spent nearly $200 million on campaign contributions and lobbying. According to Lerer, "They've stacked their payrolls with top Washington power brokers of all political stripes, including Republican John McCain's presidential campaign manager, Rick Davis; Democrat Barack Obama's original vice presidential vetter, Jim Johnson; and scores of others now working for the two rivals for the White House."
Last Sunday's New York Times put it as bluntly as anyone ever has: "In Washington, Fannie and Freddie's sprawling lobbying machine hired family and friends of politicians in their efforts to quickly sideline any regulations that might slow their growth or invite greater oversight of their business practices. Indeed, their rapid expansion was, at least in part, the result of such artful lobbying over the years."
What a beautiful term: "artful lobbying." It means honest graft.
Look at any of the important issues bogged down in the swampland along the Potomac and you don't have to scrape away the muck too deeply to find that campaign cash is at the core of virtually every impasse. We're spending more than six percent of our salaries on gasoline, and global warming keeps temperatures rising but the climate bill was killed last month and President Bush just got rid of his daddy's longtime ban on offshore drilling. Only in a fairy tale would anyone believe it's just coincidence that the oil and gas industries have donated more than $18 million to federal candidates this year, three-quarters of it going to Republicans. They've spent more than $26 million lobbying this year -- that's seven times more than environmental groups have spent.
Follow the money -- it goes from your gas tank to the wine bars and steak houses of DC, where the payoffs happen. Or ponder that FISA surveillance legislation that just passed the Senate. It let the big telecommunications companies off the hook for helping the government wiretap our phones and laptops without warrants. Over the years those telecom companies have given Republicans in the House and Senate $63 million dollars and Democrats $49 million. No wonder that when their lobbyists reach out and place a call to Congress, they never get a busy signal. Do the same without making a big contribution, and you'll be put on "hold" until the embalmer shows up to claim your cold corpse.
The late journalist Meg Greenfield once wrote that trying to get money out of politics is akin to the quest for a squirrel-proof birdfeeder. No matter how clever and ingenious the design, the squirrels are always one mouthful ahead of you.
Here's an example. Corporations are limited in how much they can contribute to candidate's campaigns, right? But someone's always figuring out how to open another back door. So Democrats have turned to Steve Farber. He's using the resources of his big K Street law and lobbying factory to help raise $40 million for the Democratic National Convention. Half a dozen of his clients have signed up, including AT&T, Comcast, Western Union and Google. Their presence at the convention will offer lots of opportunities to curry favors at private parties while ordinary delegates wander Denver looking for the nearest Wendy's. By the way, just as you pay at the gas pump for those energy lobbyists to wine and dine your representatives in Washington, you'll pay on April 15 for Denver -- corporations can deduct their contributions.
Another back door -- one quite familiar to Steve Farber and his ilk -- leads to presidential libraries. Bill Clinton's in Arkansas required serious political bucks, and we're not talking penny ante fines for overdue books. Again, there's no limit to the amount a donor can give and no obligation to reveal their names. Clinton's cost $165 million and we still don't know the identities of everyone who put up the dough, even though four years ago a reporter stumbled on a list that included Arab businessmen, Saudi royals, Hollywood celebs and the governments of Dubai, Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei and Taiwan. Hmmm....
Once George W. is out of the White House, he, too, plans what one newspaper described as a "legacy polishing" institute -- a presidential library and think tank at Southern Methodist University in Dallas costing half a billion dollars. Last Sunday, The Times of London released a remarkable video of one of the president's buddies and fund raisers -- Stephen Payne, a political appointee named to the Homeland Security Advisory Council.
The Times set him up in a video sting, and taped a conversation in which Payne offers an exiled leader of Kyrgyzstan meetings with such White House luminaries as Vice President Cheney and Condoleezza Rice -- provided he makes a whopping contribution to the Bush Library, and an even bigger payment to Payne's lobbying firm. Payne tells him, "It will be somewhere between $600,000 and $750,000, with about a third of it going directly to the Bush Library... That's gonna be a show of 'we're interested, we're your friends, we're still your friends.'"
The White House denies any connection between library contributions and access to officials and harrumphed at the preposterous idea that Payne had a close relationship with the President. Unfortunately, there's at least one photo of Payne with the President cutting brush at his Crawford ranch. There's also one of Payne demonstrating more guts than common sense, on a rifle range with Deadeye Dick Cheney.
Payne, who now is supporting John McCain, says he's done nothing wrong, but a congressional investigation intends to find out. So from the financial meltdown brought on by predatory lending to global warming to tax breaks and other favors, the late California politician Jesse "Big Daddy" Unruh got it right: Money is the mother's milk of politics. He knew what he was talking about, because Big Daddy swigged it by the gallon. Now it has curdled into a witch's brew.
Bill Moyers is managing editor and Michael Winship is senior writer of the weekly public affairs program Bill Moyers Journal, which airs Friday night on PBS. Check local airtimes or comment at The Moyers Blog at www.pbs.org/moyers.
53 Comments so far
Show AllThey say this used to be a great country. I guess it still is for a few. I wonder how I will buy groceries and pay utilities ... Many, many are a lot worse off than I. Keep the idiot box on to distract yourself. Small ideas for an ever smaller-minded people. Consumerism - viva la herd!
First of all-with term limits, you limit the time of our elected members of congress and the lobbyists have unlimited access and influence. Follow the money-the lobbyists make the rules and congress follows. It is up to the voters to put a halt to all the corporate tax breaks. Obama has ignited a movement of new voters and they won't stand for the same old money game.
I think that most people would agree that financial influence is undermining almost every component of our republic. I strongly agree with Mr. Bill Moyer's quotation of journalist Meg Greenfield, that "trying to get money out of politics is akin to the quest for a squirrel-proof birdfeeder." As Mr. Moyers illustrates, experience has shown that it is futile to try to eliminate financial influence. I conclude that we must properly accommodate financial influence in the design of the republic.
I suggest a third house of Congress where seats are auctioned off for one year terms. One might call it "The Fundry" for lack of a better term. The Fundry would be coequal with the House and Senate: To become law, each bill would have to be approved by majority vote in each of the Fundry, House, and Senate. The purpose of the Fundry would be to divert financial influence away from the rest of the national government. Those who presently exert financial influence generally have to bribe both major parties, and then hope that the winning candidate stays bought and is competent, and also hope that their bribe does not run afoul of the law or public opinion. In short, present financial influence is inefficient, even though it is dominant. Financial influence by bidding on a seat in the Fundry would avoid all of these inefficiencies, thus enhancing the effectiveness of the diversion of financial influence away from the other branches. We can be confident that the only significant financial influence that would NOT be diverted would be that which cannot be pooled nationally because it represents very local interests. But, that is what we want: our Senators and Representatives are supposed to represent local interests.
I realize many initially rebel against the concept of explicitly accomodating financial influence, because financial influence has such a bad reputation, and justifiably so. But, other components of a well designed republic have had similarly bad reputations, for the same reasons, before they were properly accomodated within governments. Those who advocated democracy were protrayed as advocating mob rule. Such was the reputation of democracy in France before the French Revolution of 1789. Yes, one of the three bodies of the Estates General was democratic, but it did not have veto power, and therefore the mobs raged. After the French Revolution of 1789, advocacy of charismatic leadership was regarded as advocacy of despotism. Yet, the French quickly fell under the domination of first Robespierre and then Napolean, which were despots. Any natural power that is not properly accomodated in a republic will exercise its power anyway, but in a manner detrimental to the republic. Financial influence has proven to be one of those natural powers.
I certainly understand concerns that people may have about such a significant change to Congress. Therefore, we should experiment with Fundries in bodies of lesser power before amending the Constitution. We should implement Fundries in civic, charitable, and commercial entities.
But, we should experiment quickly before it is too late and our republic dies.
Regarding collinsa's call for "a bloody revolution:" What, are you working for the FBI? Are you the guy that tore down the American flag at the 1968 Democratic Convention protest, to make the protesters look bad?
What it's going to take is a LOT less hot air, (and I'm not just referring to the aforementioned comment, I mean seemingly unending hot air commenting all over the internet) and a lot more good work.
First, Bill Moyers didn't do his homework on the campaign finance issue, when he had David Beckman of Bread for the World on his show to talk about the farm bill. They claimed that it was "commodity growers" who were found to dominate farm politics. Anyone involved in farm politics knows better and if you check out their source, the database at Open Secrets dot org, it's easy to see that it's not "commodity growers" that give the big bucks at all, but rather the agribusiness output (Commodity buyers, like Cargill, ADM, Tyson) and input (selling inputs to but in the crops, etc., like Monsanto) sectors, the industrial complex that dominates and exploits family farmers world wide.
Second, most of the "good groups," like those who can post press releases at this site, were not on board with good information about how the mega money issues work in the Commodity Title of the U.S. farm bill. Most groups and individuals who truly care were on the wrong side of the issue, siding with the agribusiness input/output industrial complex, focusing on farmer subsidies. But farmer subsidies are compensations for massive losses. We lost nearly 140 billion from the market just on corn and wheat, 1981-2006, dumping on poor rural regions world wide and subsidizing U.S. and foreign processors, animal factories and consumers.
We needed price floors with supply management to end this massive dumping (these are policies led in the U.S. by the National Family Farm Coalition, showing support for the Africa Group at WTO and Via Campesina and Global Farmer). We also needed strategic reserves with price ceilings to address price spikes like we have now (fall 2006-2008). Again NFFC is the leader, with most like minded individuals and groups not knowing enough to be on our side.
So there's plenty of work to do just to get like minded people to know what the issues really are.
Next, individuals and groups need to learn the skills, what to actually do. Too much I've seen methods like holding up signs so passing cars will figure out what the skills are, learn them, apply them etc. Nonsense. Spend your hour per week planning effective influence with those who really make the key decisions.
Or I see people getting arrested in symbolic protests that either aren't targeted to actual decision makers or that don't ask the decision makers to do anything, or anything of substance.
Chomsky says just join activist groups, that's all. Doesn't he? But from where I stand, most groups have no real idea of how to win and have never won anything significant. Most groups, even if they start to take effective action, don't know what to do "when they say no." "Ok, we failed, but we tried, I guess that's what counts." Nonsense.
Some groups know how to win, and on issues against corporate power. Learn how they do it. I once took a call from the Chairman of the House Banking Committee, when he called to our ratty little office to concede on efforts to gut the Community Reinvestment Act. Didn't the Western Organization of Resource Councils win seven out of ten conservative western senators against GATT and WTO? Hey folks, learn the skills.
Read Roger Fisher, "Beyond Machiavelli" and his "Coping with International Conflict," and his "Getting Ready to Negotiate," (the how-too workbook you'll need). Read "Getting Past No." But you also need to do this as a group method so read Shel Trapp's booklets, "Dynamics of Organizing "and "Basics of Organizing." These two are online.
Shape up folks! You too Moyers.
The problem with the excess of wealth in the hands of a few is it's escalation; the more money gets there, the more power is wielded to keep the money coming in (and to increase it). We literally create monsters when we give an inch, or a yard, to the wealthy few. More tax breaks and deregulation have worked their magic; an almost guaranteed suppression of democracy. We're in trouble because big interests have gotten REALLY BIG. It may be now that the only thing that's going to change this picture is an economic disaster - and a bloody revolution.
Moyers has done some wonderful things.
His program with David Beckman on the farm bill, however was false and misleading. They missed the dumping issue, and how higher farm prices are good for farmers throughout the poor regions of the world, even though, with volatility following 55 years of devastating policies to lower farm prices, they increase starvation short term.
They missed support for strategic reserves and price ceilings, as well as price floors and supply management. See the National Family Farm Coalition online.
So many people think that 'follow the money' just means back to the particular corrupt businessman who is feeding the corrupt politician - but that's the small fish. You really need to think about where all that money comes from in the first place - and THEN you will start to see some light (hint - it ain't the gov). All explained in more detail here - Banketeering - how the banks have been stealing trillions from you, and the tap is still running . And for a look at what kind of society we might achieve if we take control of our money, there's a book called Green Island that does some exploring, and offers a positive vision of what we might do if we get out from under the bank-capitalist chain.
Mordechai Shiblikov July 19th, 2008 12:11 pm
Laissez faire is French for "bend over and grab your ankles".
Supurb!
"There is sufficiency in the world for man's need -- but not for man's greed."
and,
"Politics without principles;
commerce without moralty;
wealth without charity;
science without humanity;
education without character --
are not only useless -- they
are positively dangerous."
That was an entertaining piece! I especially liked this: "...telecom companies have given Republicans in the House and Senate $63 million dollars and Democrats $49 million. No wonder that when their lobbyists reach out and place a call to Congress, they never get a busy signal. Do the same without making a big contribution, and you'll be put on "hold" until the embalmer shows up to claim your cold corpse."
I won't hesitate to go hunting with Moyers and Winship.
Southern - An Obama world would look a whole lot like a Clinton world (Bill or Hill). Rethug lite.
Tastes Great. Slightly less killing.
Just out of curiosity, what does an Obama world really look like? I'm still trying to understand why anyone thinks anything will change if all the powers that truly decide things in this country are STILL there after the election. I want to believe... but I am not hearing anything that makes me think there is going to be any change as long as we the people stay as clueless as we are about how corrupt things really are.
The answer to all this private special interest money in politics is PUBLIC FINANCING OF CAMPAIGNS. Arizona and Maine have already proven it works and Congress has a bi-partisan bill before it right now that would establish publicly funded campaigns for both houses: The Fair Elections Now Act, sponsored by Dick Durbin and Arlen Specter. There's another bi-partisan bill sponsored by Russ Feingold and Susan Collins to update the broken presidential public financing system. Let's get on with it.
great short post from starkraving above:
Vote Obama, but live Nader/McKinney. Eventually it will trickle up.
And your rebellion - not revolution - got rid of the landed gentry ( Barons, Earls, the "nobility" ), taxationwithout representation? Right; wrong. The robber BARONS still exist and you all pay hommage to them via the "American Dream" except most of them started out with silver spoons in their mouths or are outright criminals.
"We just don't seem able to see or accept the fact that money drives policy."....
Yes, it definitely does--And who owns America? The top 1% owns 40% of the national financial wealth--the top 10% own 85-90% of all stocks, bonds, trust funds and business equities and over 75% of non-home real estate. The bottom 80% own only 9% of financial wealth....
Thus...our policies are being driven by the top 10% who own the money.
And if Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae collapse--that 10% group will write laws that so that the 80% pay most of the cost.
Its the "dominator value" system that overlays all of this--and unless we recognize this--we'll simply continue to perpetuate it.
Read Ellen Brown's July 14th blog entry at www.webofdebt.com She shows in 5 short pages ways we could effectively change the money system.
Also read Eisler's Real Wealth of Nations--she shows how we can expose the "dominator value system" and replace it with one that works.
GOOD POSTS: ROCKER BABE, FV HORN & REDWRITEMAN
Rockerbabe1 July 19th, 2008 5:19 pm
Works for me
I found an old bird cage, about two feet in diameter and three feet tall. I hung it from the tallest oak, on the longest branch, and in the center hangs a cylinder filled with different seeds. The small finches and tits in my yard are able to get in and out easily yet any self-respecting squirrel would have to leap and risk life and limb just to get to the outer part of it. Some have tried, only to be disappointed after wasting countless hours trying to crack the code. Sure, a few seeds fall to the ground and the rest of the squirrels scurry around fighting over every morsel. Yet it's hung there for five years and accommodates most of the back yard fauna nicely.
I suspect there are just as clever ways of shutting down lobbyists, a few may require risking the outer limbs of good sense, but it's just that we all are tied to the teat, and few of us are willing to risk either life or limb.
Bill Moyers should just SHUT UP and SUPPORT RALPH NADER !!!!
VOTENADER.ORG !!!!!
The authors say: "...because we refuse to recognize the connection between money and politics." Who is refusing to recognize that? Everyone knows about it!
Actually, too many of us are refusing to recognize the connection between economic CLASS and politics, but I am confident that the authors recognize it. Why do they they refuse to utter the word? Because that would validate communism, and they support reformist capitalism! Liberalism is poison to the fight for global justice. No matter how home-spun and nice they seem, these men must be considered agents of the imperialist ruling class.
Just to note: Major banks in California are refusing to honor cashiers cheques from Indymac when people try to open new accounts after emptying their Indymac accounts.
And when major banks won't recognize each other's cheques, that can not be a good thing...
... can you say 'Crash and Burn'? I knew you could!
Once again I object not to Daniel David's exhortation that we vote for Obama, but strenuously to his claim that it is the the only thing we need do, can do, and should do.
to say that our current economic frustrations is an accident of "closing the barn door after the horse has been let out" is naive... this has been orchestrated... this right now what we're experiencing has been staged for some time now...
the fuel "crisis" for no other reason… to release the bans on drilling... i said this months and months ago to family and friends and they didnt believe me until just this past week...
the insane thing is... that the car co's have been ready with the technology for alternative... hybrid and bio fuels for years but the oil cos havent been ready to put up the bio and alternative fuel resources at the pumps for easy public consumption....
not that the car co's are at all not responsible for this crisis as well...
i'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how GM had the power to repo electric cars in the 90's... even from those ppl that had theirs paid off in full...and get away with it!!! insanity!
but nonetheless... this has been a poorly acted play for our... the ordinary citizens... benefit... this is so that we'll all be behind the raping the last of our pristine natural resources all so that we can get some relief at the pump... (cant rape the willing right?)
but what the average citizen doesnt realize... that for us to see any real benefit from that drilling wont be for over a decade… 2030 is what the analysts have been saying recently… yet much smaller … less advanced countries have been able to COMPLETELY remove themselves from foreign and fossils fuel dependency in just a handful of years...
so we could easily... by the time that oil has been readied for public consumption... have the need for it be obsolete (not that the oil cos will ever do this willingly without some major revolution and shift of power)
and the economic crisis... this wasnt an accident of greed ppl... we're being set up...
all for the N A U (No Amer i can Union)... this is in works ... whether we want it or not... it will be announced by 2010... and there wont be major upheavals by ppl... there wont be a revolution in the streets of america... canada and mexico... just like ppl are cheering today when politicians talk about offshore oil drilling... and watch the rising number of ppl that approve of removing the bans...
ppl will be doing the same with the N A U... because it will be presented as a salvation in the releif of the economic distress of the everyday joe...
think i'm wrong?
ask someone what they felt about off shore oil drilling a decade ago... and ask them what they think about it now...
its all manufactured so that when it comes time... they can get hundreds of million of ppl to go along with the N W O!!!
and just in case... just in case there will be some that will protest... thats what the camps are for... thats what the poisoning of our food supply is for... thats why all this has been about... power... and it will never be about anything else...
and never for a second believe that this situation is an accident of greed!
as far as who to vote for to do the best by us... um yeah... as long as the electoral college is still in place... our votes really dont mean anything... 2000... gore overwhelmingly won the popular vote... yet.. here we are... two terms of bush...
so the decision of who is going to be in office come january... has mostly been made.... i'm sure the evidence of obama's about face on fisa is proof.. and if you dont think thats enough.. how about his advocating for a national security force that will equal our military... anyone stop and ask the esteemed candidate... what would be the purpose of this force? and the new policy of talking to our "enemies" and the shift of troops to Afghanistan by bushco.. again… that's just a wink at everyone in the "know" to let ppl know.. this is the guy that's taking office come January!
the play has been written and the actors have been rehearsing on a smaller stage for some time now... but the grand opening of the improved script is about to be revealed... and you can suffer or start preparing now to not be affected by this insanity thats coming to a stage... err i mean office near you!
but.... if we all stop buying into the need for a federal unified country and start working on our local levels for independence... not from foreign oil or big business... but independence from our reincarnated king george... then we have a slim chance of staving off ... not this invisible slavery... but the very real slavery thats coming to the ppl very soon!
we have got to stop buying the hype that as a whole we're nothing without the fed!
ppl... the british are coming... the british are coming.... errr i mean... the british are here... the british are here...
got tea?
texas tea that is!
Ron Paul, Chuck Hagel, and Dennis Kucinich are not on tickets.
Baraq H. Obama, Jr. and John Mack are similar in practice of politics and, certainly, on the tickets.
But, John Mack is older and has more political experience than kid Obama, Jr. does.
After very careful consideration of all aspects, I will vote for Old John Mack.
Old John Mack will be the next president of America.
We can't expect that taxes will be raised on those who write the tax laws. That is why progressive taxation has not worked.
A better idea is to have a referendum on who pays what and how much in taxes.
Better yet, have a referendum limiting a person's net worth. It can be high enough to keep the profit motive, but low enough to prevent excessive money-power concentration.
Any wealth cap excess must be given away to people, not to organizations, corporations, institutions, churches, government, etc. to prevent power concentration.
www.nationalinitiative.us
Impeachment On The Line This Week @ House Judiciary Committee
"Is the hearing pro forma?"
"Could be for real."
"How?"
"By popular demand."
"Expressed how?"
"Online."
"Any other means?"
"Mass vigils outside the district offices of every congressperson who opposes the impeachment of President George Bush."
"Say we succeed in gettomg Congress to impeach the president, then what sort of world?"
"Empowered by our victory over the powers that be, it'll be up to us."
If you can't have the best government that money can buy, then I guess the communists won.
The house always wins. That's why they drowned it in a bathtub.
Spare Change You Can Believe In.
The last time things were this bad was 1929. Yes, it was a different world back then, but certain truths are timeless.
In the 1920s, the public that was continually being screwed by the oligarchs who were leveraging the country while looting the treasury. Nonetheless, many kept voting for the same bastards who were sticking it to them.
Back then, as it is today, it was a combination of scaring just enough fools to vote against their interests (using the media, as William Randolph Hearst was the Rupert Murdoch of his day) along with just the right amount of sporatic election fraud that gave the right wing back then their necessary margins of victory.
Then the depression hit and people finally woke up (near starvation and imminent eviction will wake up anyone). A million plus vote handicap was not enough to help the right wing retain power.
What followed was FDR and a set of widespread progressive policies that, while not perfect, ushered in the greatest era of shared prosperity in the history of the world. It was a legacy continued and expanded upon by progressive democrats up until LBJ.
It was not a perfect time, God knows, but it was an era when, by and large, people actually believed that government was looking out for them most of the time, and there were actually enough people with power in government actually doing it. The right-wing was still powerful and running interference, of course, but the progressive side was equally strong and managed to get things done.
Sooner of later, as suffering becomes more widespread and more intolerable, there will be a massive social upheaval. And the right wing knows it.
That is why they are entrenching themselves now by doing everything they can to grant more and more police and survellence powers to government.
They are putting the tools in place to quell the rebellion they know will come someday.
Their cronies in the media are desperately trying to ferment ethnic, religious and idealogical divisions among the exploited classes as to keep the lid on anti-oligarch discontent.
So the bottom line is history ultimately repeats itself. The exploited classes will eventually have had enough and turn on its rulers. But we will have to sink a lot lower into desperate economic waters before that will happen.
I'm a cold corpse
Great piece.
The solutions:
1) Raise taxes on high incomes. They are ridiculously low.
2) Ban private contributions to parties and pay them according to their electoral following from the federal budget. Can't get more expensive than what the US military adventures abroad cost.
And it would mean the end of these zillion dollar campaigns.
3) Allot equitably shared air-time for everyone running for president or Congress, irrespective of their financial power. TV-stations just have to run the ads to keep their licenses, it's supposed to be part of their patriotic duties. Yes, it can be done. One just needs the will to do it.
If money can buy an office, we've left the realm of democracy and are in the realm of oligarchies, after all.
4) Ban Diebold's computer-assisted voting.
Wow. Banker comment spam. Only on CD. :->
(Actually I just this morning got 4% on a 7 month CD at a sizable bank. 4% isn't my idea of good money, and it SURE isn't Clinton-era rates, but it beats the heck of of the -5% being paid by Mattress Savings and Loan. It's worth keeping an eye on the online "specials" sometimes...)
Now it has curdled into a witch's brew.
That is it.
It is going to be weird ugly from here on out.
wilmoor wrote "the fed only protects the $100,000. So to really keep it safe, spread it around to many banks. They talked as though no one existed with less than several million they had to worry about." If you have less than $100,000 in an FDIC insured account, you really don't have to worry about the bank having problems. Earlier this year, I had a bank account where the FDIC took over on a Friday and I was able to get access to my money on Monday. I was able to keep using the same checks and online banking. It was a little hassle but not much really. The experts were talking about a different set of people's problems, and you wilmoor have the problems of someone with less than a $100,000 saved. Hopefully you will get the financial advice you need on some other show.
Wilmoor also said "I kept wondering what would happen if we all took our puny little savings that fall far below that $100,000 out of the banks and put them in a sock. Might be interesting." Then you would really have to worry about your money being safe, from a house break-in or fire. You might play a part in making a bank fail, but it wouldn't help you. Also, your money would not be available to lend out to others, so that would tend to make mortgage rates go up and make new mortgages less available. You also would not be making any interest at all, and thus your money would be suffering even more from inflation eating away at your purchasing power. If you look around, you can probably find someplace to get 3% safely on your money in an FDIC insured account. Check out http://bankdeals.blogspot.com/.
Capitalism in a nutshell: buy low and screw that guy and sell high and screw that guy too. Some moral system, eh? Our own government officials (all of the Republicans, but too many Democrats as well) are now UTTERLY CORRUPT. See Jonathan Chait's book, THE BIG CON for explanation of how the Bribers, Corrupters and Moneygrubbers have fucked everything up in the American government, for their own nefarious purposes, during the last thirty years.
IT IS ALL ENRON ACCOUNTING NOW.
The Business Schools should now all be closed down as evil dens of iniquity. Or, the least the B-schools could do is shutter their pretend-'business ethics' courses as the total failures they have been.
Under capitalism, you have NO RIGHT TO LIVE. You must pay for the 'privilege'. Capitalism is not the gentle, though touchingly naive, view of Marx's 'from each according to their ability, to each, according to their need.' Capitalism is class-war social Darwinism, 'the strong eat the weak, those who can kill without conscience will dominate, greed is good, selfishness is the best and most absolute ideal (Ayn Rand/Alan Greenspan).' Or in a word, Fascism, rule by the plutarchs and oligarchs of super-national corporations, which is the New World Order.
How do the Clintons, a couple of public servatns, wind up with $100 milion? How does Cheney, a public servant, wind up as the multi-millionaire Chairman of a business he had no experience in, after giving that same business public-money contracts worth billions of dollars a year for what looks like the entire future life of the nation? How does Phil Gramm, an Utterly Corrupt politician, wind up on the board of UnionBankSwitzerland after selling out the American people with congressional bills against any regulation of banking, collateralization, derivatives, commodities trading, or any of the fraudlent accounting manipulations the money boys could dream up to line their own pockets with in the last fifteen years, future of this nation be damned?
How does McCain, who should have gone TO PRISON for his involvement in the Savings and Loan scandal of the Reagan era, become the nominee for President of a major political party DURING AN EXACTLY SIMILAR PERIOD OF CRISIS in the Banking sector?
And why can't the over-paid 'smart' people running things see that our current crisis is a DEBT BOMB that has GONE OFF? And the answers are only two: raise the incomes of people so they can support the debt, or lower the price of housing and other things until the price/debt can be supported by incomes?
And why cna't they see what is needed is to get the pure gambling out of the system by banning derivatives, funnymoney mortgages, fraudulent mark-to-market housing prices, futures, options, warrants, margins, and all the phoney phinancial shenanigans of the financial fraudsters, the guys like Mitt Romney?
Neither of these solutions appeal to the CorpoFascist Masters, so a third option is now being Played on the American people by these ConMen. Use the Federal government to BAIL OUT the Masters and KEEP THE MASSES IN CHAINS to the International Bankers. The Masters, like the utterly corrupt FinSec Paulson, cannot let the peons off the hook from the bankers, or the Masters' house of cards collapses.
They do not want to share their wealth, so raising incomes is off-the-table. So they must delude the people into thinking the Masters have the people's best interest at heart, when the Masters steal and manipulate the People's money for themselves, in order to keep the people chained and enslaved to mortgages and corporations that 'deign to allow you to live'.
So it goes. And almost nowhere in this money-corrupted American government do I see an honest man.
1. Term limits for all members of Congress and the Supreme Court of the United States.
2. Ban lobbist, except from professional organizations and then only allow one person to visit each member of Congress once every 6 mos. No special interest access to the President either.
3. Wouldn't it be nice, if ordiniary Americans could actually speak directly to their President, like they used to be able to do. Pass a law requiring the President hold at least 25 townhall meetings/year and 50 every two years. One in each state of the Union. Require that there be at least 50% of the attendees be from independents or the opposition party and not hand picked by the ruling power. Same for the Congress.
4. Maybe we could fix the Supreme Court by requiring that at least 2 member be non-lawyers; wouldn't that get their black robes in a wad? Might be able to get some common sense back into the opinions.
5. Citizen lead changes to the Constitution of the US.
- An Equal Rights Amendment for women.
- Ban hand guns; esp now that convicted criminals have decided the latest Supreme Court ruling applies to them also.
- Campaign finance reform.
- Universial Healthcare.
- No war without expressed written and voted approval from both sides of the Congress.
- Remove voting issues from the Supreme Court's jurisdiction as they don't support democracy since one can vote, but not have the right to have that vote counted.
- Ban government sanctioned torture here and abroad.
- Base tax law upon income and not marital status; grant single people the same rights as married people - no favoritism, that is also the 14th amendment.
There are a few other things, but I will save those for later.
I agree starkraving.
Mordechai, The negative feedback I got for suggesting you were Republican was worth it to find out that many consider Republican a low form of life. Anyway, I'm sorry.
vote obama, but live nader/mckinney. eventually it will trickle up.
What is astonishing is that people who call themselves progressives will read this article, agree with it, then turn around and vote against their own interests by maintaining the same system this article argues forcefully against. Such is the nature of sheepland...
Don't grimice when Obama or McPain push the big wennie where the sun don't shine.
Presidential candidates Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, life-long public servant Ralph Nader and Green Party nominee Cynthia McKinney received not a dime of bribe money from the financial "services" or real estate industries, and wouldn't accept it even if it were offered, which it wasn't, because all three have promised to, as JJ might put it, cut their f**king nuts off.
But, no, please, pay no attention - go ahead and vote for corporate-approved BO and his "change we can believe in," (as opposed to the change we can't.)
Worship the market forces? Go back to 1980, Reagan's goons wanted accelerated theft, the best way to start attacking working stiffs is to add the lie of a competitive marketplace. Lay them off, eliminate their benefits, bloodlessly destroy their hard fought for safety nets and let defense contractors/corporations loot. This is called facism, but some people will vote for it continuously. With all due respect to Moyers, part of a ponzi scheme is that it ends at some point, so the next one can begin.
Lose your job, lose your house, visit the emergency room and destroy your credit - and still have faith in a system that allows you to be an indentured slave for your remaining days. The yellow stream of trickle down, and people refuse to fight back - incredible!
"...when you worship market forces as if they were the gods of Olympus, then the gods can do no wrong — until, of course, they prove to be human."
Oligarchy money hoarding conservative worshippers of market forces, have convinced many they are free marketeers. But by monopolizing resources and preventing competition, they hold markets captive to their tiny fraction of 1% of the population.
If we take our cues from the real free market, nature, it works because money doesn't exist in it. Money lets a person concentrate power and resources in unnatural, anti-Darwinian ways. A wild animal can only hoard as much power and resources as what it can personally defend. It can't pay or force others to do it for him, like people with huge amounts of money can.
More people also means less resources to go around. Instead of colonizing Mars, why not fix this planet first by lowering our populations to carrying capacity? That won't happen unless we begin by tossing out government that only represents a tiny few who profit from overpopulation's cheap labor.
The proven answer is direct democracy.
www.nationalinitiative.us
I've watched a couple of shows where four or five economists are discussing ways people can keep their money safe during these trying times. So funny. One thing was that if you have over $100,000 in an account, you need to take the excess and put it in another account because the fed only protects the $100,000. So to really keep it safe, spread it around to many banks. They talked as though no one existed with less than several million they had to worry about. I kept wondering what would happen if we all took our puny little savings that fall far below that $100,000 out of the banks and put them in a sock. Might be interesting.
So many times I've thought about writing Kuchinich in come November, but that thought is fleeting. I know by doing so I'd be wasting my vote. Same with voting green. Sure, if everyone did it, it might work. But I know they won't, and I'm a cautious gambler. The stakes are way too high at this moment in history, and I agree with Daniel David 100%. Voting the neophites Obama is our best bet.
I also plan to vote for every new face running for congress, only this time it'll be only dems or indies.
This is a major, if not primary, reason I support Wealth Redistribution. Of course we must try to reduce the influence money has on policy, but at the end of the day, its going to still wield extraordinary influence. Get rid of direct influence, and indirect influence rears its head. Its like trying to turn back the tide. But if we're going to live in a 'one dollar, one vote' democracy, shouldn't the dollars be coming from more than 10% of the population? Thanks to the Reagan and Bush tax cuts, the wealthiest 10% of the population owns 75% of the country, up from 55% before 1975. I think such 'monopolistic wealth ownership' is actually dangerous for our capitalism as it impedes the competition necessary to a vibrant capitalism. But its effect on our democracy is nothing short of tragic. I'd prefer a return to our tax policy from 1930 to 1980 that kept the wealthiest 10% of the country from owning more than 60% of the nation. That excess ownership, since 1980, has been spent affecting our democracies laws, both in passage and enforcement, and the result has been horrifying. Many of the more recent failures: massive public and private debt, outsourcing policy failures, immigration policy failures, education, health, and War policy, are all closely driven by the fact that for a certain percentage of the population, these aren't failures at all, but successes.
What I've seen in America since 1975, is a progressive 'enslavement' of the American working and middle class. Its hard to believe it, but such enslavement is actually a good thing, for a certain class of American.
Which is why it is happening.
As usual, good piece.
But, so what?
What will be done about it all? Nothing.
The only two things we can do is to: 1. Politically, support Nader. We all know he will support us. 2. Take to the streets this August in Denver.
If you want "change" you're gonna have to make it happen we're gonna have to force it.
There simply isn't an easy way out.
Barney Frank- most liberal representative.
"No one expects equality, equality is not a good thing, you can't have an economy that works if everything's equal," said Frank. "But too much inequality also has negative consequences."
They are the hunters. You are the prey.
No one candidate can save us from a corrupt, rigged system. So what do we do? From the Green Party Platform: "1. Political debate, public policy, and legislation should be judged on their merits, not on the quid pro quo of political barter and money.
2. We propose comprehensive campaign finance reform, including caps on spending and contributions, at the national and state level; and / or full public financing of elections to remove undue influence in political campaigns.
3. All viable candidates at the state and federal levels should have free and equal radio and television time and print press coverage."
Of the major candidates for President, only Cynthia McKinney (www.runcynthiarun.org) and Nader will speak up for systemic reform. Others will propose band-aids, but not real change.
My own position paper on campaign finance is available at the Issues page of my website: www.votejohnwages.com.
John M. Wages, Jr.
Candidate for US House, MS-01
I have nothing but respect for Bill Moyers and his writer of material for the Bill Moyers Journal.
But the above fails to exhort ordinary Americans to do the one thing they actually can do to buck the trend. That, of course, is to actually support Barack and Michelle, our relative political neophytes. People do not realize that there is almost nothing imaginable more effective to bust this game than a fearless and educated lady from Chicago's South Side (Michelle) every now and then emerging from The White House to yell SAY WHAT??????? about the excesses of money in Washington. Hillary was "said" in 1992 to be a "Twofer" with Bill. I can assure you that Michelle actually will be.
Drive the lobbyists into the sea. Term limits are a must.
All political positions are to be allotted by a lottery system, like the draft. We could not do any worse than we have if our representatives were chosen randomly.
Make the willful violation of the oath of office a capital offense.
The mythology of market worship wears thin in hard times. People homeless, unemployed, uninsured and hungry tend to see the truth of capitalism more clearly. As the value of the dollar declines and the economy grinds to a halt, angry people will be demanding real change.
Sometimes you get what you pay for. Did they spend more than 30 pieces of silver to betray America?
Laissez faire is French for "bend over and grab your ankles".