Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Rabbit Ragu Democrats
In the annals of American excess, there often arrives a moment when those with too much money, too much clout and too much hubris just can’t stop themselves from tempting the fates. They throw an over-the-top party in public, or parade their wealth and power before the press, and the next thing you know their world, and sometimes ours, has crashed.
In the go-go Reagan 1980s, the junk bond king Michael Milken bedazzled investors with lavish Predators’ Balls in Beverly Hills. Sure enough, he and Wall Street would end the decade in ruin. Back East, the financier Saul Steinberg celebrated his 50th birthday in 1989 with a $1 million party in the Hamptons. “Honey, if this moment were a stock, I’d short it,” he said when toasting his wife. He would soon suffer a stroke and see his company go bankrupt.
Steinberg sold his vast New York apartment to the private equity titan Stephen Schwarzman. In February 2007, Schwarzman marked his 60th birthday with a highly visible multimillion-dollar bacchanal in the Park Avenue Armory. Though Schwarzman hasn’t suffered much since — he is tied for 50th on the new Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest Americans — his bash presaged the bust to come. He became, as James Stewart wrote in The New Yorker, “the designated villain of an era on Wall Street — an era of rapacious capitalists and heedless self-indulgence.”
It’s in this context that you have to wonder what some of the Obama era’s most moneyed and White House-connected lobbyists were thinking as they preened before a Washington Post reporter recently for two lengthy articles. We’re not even nine months into the new administration, yet these swaggering, utterly un-self-aware influence peddlers seem determined to prove that nothing except the party affiliations has changed in the Beltway’s pay-for-play culture since Tom DeLay. If these lobbyists were stocks, I’d short them.
One of the articles focused on Heather Podesta — “The It Girl of a New Generation of Lobbyists” — who lobbies for health care players like Eli Lilly, HealthSouth and Cigna. Podesta is half of what The Post has called a “mega-lobbying” couple. Her husband, with his own separate (and larger) lobbying shop, is Tony Podesta, the brother of John Podesta, the Clinton White House chief of staff who ran the Obama transition. Back in November, Tony Podesta told The Times that only “very unsophisticated” clients would hire his firm because of his brother’s role in assembling the new administration. That encyclopedic and ever-expanding list of “unsophisticated” clients includes Amgen and the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity — and that’s just among the A’s. His business was up 57 percent from last year in the first six months of 2009. Heather Podesta’s was up 65 percent.
When we first meet Heather Podesta in The Post, she is being bussed on the cheek by Charles Rangel at his August birthday party at New York’s Tavern on the Green. In keeping with the usual pattern of blowback, it took only one day after the article appeared for The Times to report that Rangel, the ethically challenged chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, was guilty of yet another lapse: He’d neglected to list at least $500,000 in assets on his 2007 Congressional disclosure form. As if that were not karmic retribution enough, Tavern on the Green filed for bankruptcy just days after that.
The second Post article, on the front page two weeks ago, described the scene, as well as the rabbit ragu, at Ristorante Tosca, the lobbyists’ hangout on F Street in downtown Washington. The Post did not mention that it is just four blocks away from the location of the now defunct Signatures, the restaurant whose owner, Jack Abramoff, was the go-to fixer of the DeLay “K Street project” before scandal brought him down.
The stars of Tosca’s “Power Section,” we learned, include the Podestas, Tom Daschle (“not technically a registered lobbyist” but, as The Post put it, “a ‘special policy adviser’ — wink wink”) and Steve Elmendorf (who “eats lunch out only at Tosca”). Elmendorf was chief of staff to the former Democratic House leader Dick Gephardt. A quick visit to opensecrets.org reveals that Elmendorf Strategies’ client list includes Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, among other players in the coming battle over financial regulation reform. Then again, as The Nation details in its current issue, Gephardt has also lobbied for Goldman, among many other corporate clients in opposition to the populist policies he once championed.
Barack Obama promised a change from this revolving-door, behind-closed-doors collaboration between special interests and government. He vowed to “do our business in the light of day” — with health care negotiations broadcast on C-Span — and to “restore the vital trust between people and their government.” He said, “I intend to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over.” That those lobbyists would so extravagantly flaunt their undiminished role shows just how little they believe that a new sheriff has arrived in Dodge.
In his scathing Wall Street Journal column on The Post articles last week, Thomas Frank crystallized the gap between Obama’s pledge and this reality. “There is something uniquely depressing about the fact that the National Portrait Gallery’s version of the Barack Obama ‘Hope’ poster previously belonged to a pair of lobbyists.” That’s no joke: It was donated by Tony and Heather Podesta.
Obama’s promise to make Americans trust the government again was not just another campaign bullet point; it’s the foundation of his brand of governance and essential to his success in office. At the first anniversary of the TARP bailout of the banks, we can see how far he has to go. Americans’ continued suspicion that Washington is in cahoots with powerful interests in joints like Tosca is contributing to their confusion and skepticism about what’s happening out of view in the battle over health care reform.
The public is not wrong. The administration’s legislative deals with the pharmaceutical companies were made in back rooms. Business Week reported in early August that the UnitedHealth Group and its fellow insurance giants had already quietly rounded up moderate Democrats in the House to block any public health care option that would compete with them for business. UnitedHealth’s hired Beltway gunslingers include both Elmendorf Strategies and Daschle, a public supporter of the public option who nonetheless does some of his “wink, wink” counseling for UnitedHealth. The company’s in-house lobbyist is a former chief of staff to Steny Hoyer, the House majority leader. Gephardt consults there too.
But it’s not as if the Republicans now have the public’s back. DeLay may be reduced these days to violating public taste rather than the public trust on “Dancing With the Stars,” but back on Capitol Hill, his successors keep the K Street faith. In their campaign to kill the public option, G.O.P. leaders often cite data from the Lewin Group, a research company, which has projected that 88 million Americans might quit their private insurance plans if given a government alternative. (The Congressional Budget Office puts the figure at the far less earthshaking 10 to 11 million.) Lewin, which repeatedly insists it’s still a nonpartisan outfit, was actually bought by a subsidiary of UnitedHealth in 2007. The Huffington Post reported in August that John Boehner and Eric Cantor — who use Lewin’s findings to scare voters about a “government takeover” of health care — are big recipients of UnitedHealth campaign cash.
Next up will be the overhaul of financial regulations. With job seekers now outnumbering job openings 6 to 1 in America, many still wonder why most of the big-dog culprits who helped speed the national meltdown — from lying and gambling bankers to shyster subprime mortgage packagers to executives at delinquent ratings agencies — have not shared their pain. In his speech marking the anniversary of Lehman Brothers’ failure, Obama chastised Wall Street for having taken irresponsible risks. But of course it is already back doing exactly that.
Meanwhile, we’re hearing of behind-the-scenes Congressional softening of perhaps the most promising component of the White House’s modest financial regulatory package, a Consumer Financial Protection Agency. Real-estate brokerages are being exempted from its purview, and banks will not be required to offer “plain vanilla” mortgages. As in health care, the question of what the White House will really fight for in financial reform remains open. While the ostentatious daily predators’ ball at Ristorante Tosca is a bad omen, we don’t know yet whether that omen is for the lobbyists, or the Obama administration, or both.
This is history that the president still has the power to write. It will be written in the bills he will or won’t sign into law. We can only hope that he learned an important lesson from his stunning failure to secure Olympic gold for his political home of Chicago last week. If the Olympic committee has the audacity to stand up to a lobbyist as powerful as the president of the United States, then surely the president of the United States can stand up to the powerful interests angling to defeat his promise of reform.


23 Comments so far
Show AllA whore is a whore, is a whore! Leopards simply just don't change their spots!
Things will NEVER change in favor of the American public until lobbying is labeled for what it really is: BRIBERY - and treated as the illegal practice it is!!!!
Our government is a total SHAM!!! It is nothing more than an "old boys/girls club" peopled by lobbyists and politicians taking turns at making each other rich at the expense of the American taxpayers.
We are the laughing stock of the free world!
I agree wholeheartedly, but to compare whores with politicians is unfair to the whores. Whores at least provide a public service.
Thanks for once again explaining what our government is. I wonder how long it will take before 'the masses' of voters take it seriously.
United Health, to my knowledge, has also got itself a "nice" conviction for defrauding taxpayers and patients here in Minnesota, thus you can't say these "good people" don't have any "convictions."
AD
I don't understand why our president's attempt to secure the Olympics for the U.S. is a "stunning failure" and embarrassment but Japan's and Spain's attempts are simply part of the process. Disapointment - sure, a stunning failure - why is that?
On special interests having influence in the governmental process - Garbage In / Garbage Out. Occasionally a fine ham or slab of bacon results. Generally though, the pig that squeals the loudest is the one that is getting the most garbage from the trough at no benefit to any other than itself.
Don't be dense.
It was a smackdown.
Obama strode in thinking the world was his oyster--and if he represented what the world had hoped for--than the world would cheer him on. The world rejected him--and it was personal for him--his hometown. The world sent him a message. It took Bush 2 terms before the world refused to shake his hand, overnight, Obama is failing.
My guess he won't hear the message--just like you don't.
I wonder what our country will look after its collapse? Will we break up into four or five regional countries, like the northeast, southeast, etc. Will it be north/south like the union and the confederacy was? Or will major corporations divi it up between themselves? It will be interesting to see.
But there is no doubt that this empire is in one of the final stages before it's collapse. Like most empires corruption of it leaders is a major contributer to their fall. And folks I'm not sure how our government can be any more corrupt. I think it is pretty much incapable of doing something, anything, meaningful for the average American. It simply exists to serve corporations first, all else, the people, the environment, even the planet itself are all only secondary concerns.
I think the Obama presidency will be the final nail in the coffin of the average person having any faith in this government. He ran on hope and change. So far we aint seeing much in the change department, and the hope thing at some point has to be delivered on or people will know it's a sham.
So that's why Im betting that after the collapse you wont see the current government resurrected. There just wont be any faith left it's ability to act in the interest of we the people.
Our corporately run government seems to think the working class is endlessly exploitable. You can tax them, force them to buy insurance, legalize usury against them, have them fight endless wars, freeze their wages, ship their jobs overseas, lock them up in ever increasing numbers, and do all this while you transfer vast sums of money from their wallets into those of their rich overlords.
Deep down inside everyone knows this can't go on forever, but because of their sociopathic nature these corporations and their congressional lackies, are simply incapable of controlling themselves, and equally incapable of any empathy towards the victims of their greed. But their sick exploitation will end, and I'm guessing it won't be pretty, and will come sooner than they think. The only questions are, how soon this house of cards comes crashing down, and what things will look like after the crash.
Good luck out there, we're all going to need it.
I don't think the corporations will do that well after the collapse. Alaska will likely go back to Russia. Mexico will get back the southwest. Hawaii to Japan or China. The rest? who knows. The northeast may want to join the EU, but would the EU want them? The one thing to be sure of is that after 60 years of relentless American warmongering, the rest of the world will make certain the country does not remain intact . . . it would be too much of a threat to peace if it remained whole. We will have the same fate as Yugoslavia, only we earned ours.
"Hawaii to Japan or China..."
Why not the Hawaiians? They already have a fairly active independence movement.
Actually the most likely model of the economically collpased US is probably a giant-sized english-speaking version of El Salvador, or maybe the impoverished post-Soviet Russia.
...nothing except the party affiliations has changed in the Beltway’s pay-for-play culture since Tom DeLay.
Frank Rich used the above words to portray something he regards as false...but what he has done, is to portray the heart of what is in fact the case.
---------------------------------
I would rather vote for what I want and not get it, than vote for what I don't want and get that. -- Eugene V. Debs
Here's what I posted to the NYT:
Rich rightly notes, "Obama’s promise to make Americans trust the government again was not just another campaign bullet point; it’s the foundation of his brand of governance and essential to his success in office."
But this is obviously a facade, a falsehood, a charade of the real role of the second party, the 'peoples' party, the opposition party -- the 'Democratic' Party.
Instead the reality, which the American people are starting to actually understand is that their country is fully controlled by an entrenched ruling-elite corporate/financial EMPIRE, which hides behind the facade of a two-party, 'Vichy' sham of democracy --- and which is aided by an equally 'Vichy' corporatist media (which is only occasionally breached by truth like Rich's).
I would be inclined to refer to this as a "Parliament of Whores" (P.J. O'Rourke's term) --- except that it would be unfair to whores.
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
Sioux Rose
Although I totally agree with RICH M (as usual), I do applaud Frank Rich for at least getting it--that is the way karmic retribution (he used the phrase in this article) works, and citing at least a few powerful examples. Of course these evidence how the abuse of money took some business frauds down. I am yet awaiting the reciprocal karmic retribution depicted onto the likes of Condi, Cheney, Bush and their entire torture-dream-team, attorneys that offered illegal acts a "legal fig leaf," included. Guess the lords of karma have a long list of persons to attend to these days.
Minnesota's Senator Klobuchar never offends the big bucks corporations - her latest noncontroversial issue is childhood obesity!!!! She has refused to take a stand on the public option so our Billionaires group gave her a $1 million dollar check in appreciation. We have to expose these congressional lackeys!!! Check out the fun:
http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/node/27093
harvey wasserman
This is an excellent column by Rich, and the comments are good too.
The pivotal turning point in all this is Afghanistan. We are coming off a century-long run as the Richest/Most Powerful nation the world has ever seen.
That's now over. We've suffered through 8 years of rule by an unelected idiot.
There are many things we can say about Obama so far, but there's no doubting he has the intellectual capacity to do many things right.
It hinges now on Afghanistan. If we can get just a glimmer of turning away from conquest and empire and start to reverse course on this Battleship Titanic, other things just may follow. So let's figure out how to do it....and let's get it done!!!
No nukes/No War/U.S. Out of Afghanistan NOW!!
Please, there's no doubting Obama has the intellectual capacity to do many things right? Like what, following in Bush footsteps and continuing each and every one of his policies so far?
Obama's a miserable failure, let's stop painting a rosy picture of the man.
yeah, really...nine months is more than enough time to judge a president faced with a country trying to eat itself live...give us all a break please!
tongue firmly in cheek, yes....
We should measure time in how many Arab children are killed by our tax-payer funded brave boys in the military to consider how long we give Obama to do the right thing. Personally, my limit was one. How many more do you want killed before you will consider Obama a failure?
Sorry...shouldn't have used the term "Arab"...let's just measure by the number of children killed period.
I don't doubt President Obama's intellect. I doubt his desire to do what is in the best interest of our country if it conflicts with what is in the best interest of the Military Industrial Complex. After his flip on the FISA vote I suspected he was simply a MIC whore. From his actions as president, I have no doubt that he is. So, what will Obama do regarding Afghanistan? Duh, he will do whatever benefits the MIC, while speaking eloquently about his regret that he had no other choice.
I think Frank Rich's role is to try to keep USans starstruck while their pockets are being picked.
To NC-Tom---
Your post is interesting to me (as usual) but I suspect that you are not accounting for the underlying resiliency of this system.
There is "redundancy" built in, albeit far more in the rural areas than in the cities. Thus for example I can park two cars in my driveway and take turns driving them while if one breaks down I still have the other. In the cities it would be rare for a single person to own two cars.
The system will NOT collapse like the Twin Towers on 9/11 allegedly did, as though a heap of pancakes at IHOP suddenly lost their yeast. Instead there will be incremental degradations that creep up on human consciousness, followed by usually incremental attempts at correction. Every once in a while there will be a huge burp or belch, like the recent thousand-per-cent rise in the federal excise tax on tobacco ostensibly to provide S-CHIP "health care" for children (much of which includes prescribing really nasty Big Pharma drugs to kids suffering from false maladies like ADD, ADHD, etc. Don't feed them pseudo-amphetamines, take them off their diet of high fructose corn syrup instead...) (I notice that this tax on nicotine addicts like me went almost totally unreported in the MSM as well as so-called Progressive sites...)
It is when a society loses its capacity for redundancy that it collapses. A tiny example: when I was homeless and literally scavenging out of dumpsters to survive back in that LAST great Recession (then un-named and unacknowledged---1982-83) I noticed that a certain supermarket chain was converting from oldstyle dumpsters to pneumatic dumpsters that were inaccessible to the homeless (or anyone else interested in ripe fruit!). That supermarket chain made a political decision to reduce the social capacity for redundancy (it cost them a hell of a lot more money to hire pneumatic dumpsters. OTOH an irksome union leader could end up in a landfill and no one would notice where he/she went! Jimmy Hoffa where are you...?).
Another example: I have encountered farmers in the Midwest who delight in spraying herbicides on the wild asparagus growing along the fencelines that separate the public from the private. If the food is free it's not for thee! Kill it. (Anyone recall the book, "Stalking the Wild Asparagus"?
Another example: municipalities that hire landscape contractors to plant crabapple trees, the fruit of which is edible to almost no vertebrate unless processed to cider, thus available only to humans, except that the municipality wil not permit this! Why not something you can eat, like a Macintosh.
Another example: Goldman-Sachs kills off Lehmann Brothers because the latter seeks not the perks of being the government. God forbid!
Redundancy is anti-entropic. A vultural (sic) system that eschews it cannot survive. We have this duopoly primarily because the Idea of Singularity in the human political system simply cannot stand. (Example: the "war" between Microsoft and Apple. It took a turn that none of the early players could have predicted, only part of which was the iPhone...) Redundancy thus becomes Relative. Would you call Apple Redundant without calling it Necessary?
Another idea I have been trying to reconcile to the human condition:
The Capacity to Create Complexity, Creates Complexity. This is esp. true of Wall Street and their computers and their investment logarithms. Press a mouse button and several million "secured" Credit Default Swaps change hands. That's why they're called "swaps." The rich are short-selling the Planet!
Thanks for making me write this!
-30-