EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Big Business Has Been Very Very Good to Mitt Romney
As the noted philosopher and rock and roll irritant David Lee Roth once said, "Money can't buy you happiness, but it can buy you a yacht big enough to pull up right alongside it."
I often think of his sage words as I watch the early days of the 2012 political campaigns. For the phrase "buy you a yacht," simply substitute "buy you an election." Then behold the havoc wrought by Citizens United and other court decisions that have unleashed a mudslide of corporate cash into our electoral system, much of it anonymous, hurling the average citizen out of the democratic equation.
An estimated $40 million will be spent in those nine Wisconsin State Senate recall elections -- most of it from outside, third-party interest groups and twice what was spent last year on all 116 of the state's legislative races. Most believe President Obama will raise a billion dollars or even more for his re-election bid; enough, as NPR's Peter Overby observed, to buy up all the TV ads on the Super Bowl -- four times.
The Republican nominee may also raise and spend a billion. If it turns out to be former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, buying that electoral yacht will be a tad easier than for others. Back in 2007, The New York Times estimated his worth at nearly $350 million, and he plowed a reported $44.5 million of his own money into his 2008 presidential campaign.
Certainly, there has been a deep strain of noblesse oblige throughout the history of American governance, the wealthy feeling the urge (and having the disposable income and free time) to come to the aid of their country, both for good and ill. But with Romney, so much a complaisant creature of the corporate culture that dropped us into our current mess without a parachute, we have a tsunami-in-waiting.
As he scurries to the right, running away from his moderate record as Massachusetts governor (although there's no escaping the irony of this week's reports that the state's upgrade to an AA rating from Standard & Poor's during his tenure was achieved, in part, through tax hikes), it's illuminating to remember not only how Romney amassed his personal fortune but also how the fundraising apparatus surrounding him probes for yet more ways to scam the system. Not content with the freewheeling liberties already granted by the courts, his money machine relentlessly pursues ever more insidious routes to the fattest wallets and checkbooks.
The opening chapters may be familiar to you. As a June 2007 article in the Times reported, Romney's personal fortune was amassed from his leadership at the private equity firm Bain Capital. "Mr. Romney's Bain career -- a source of money and contacts that he has used to finance his Massachusetts campaigns and to leap ahead of his presidential rivals in early fund-raising... exposes him to criticism that he enriched himself excessively, sometimes by cutting jobs to increase profits." The newspaper quoted Boston University business professor James E. Post: "Increasingly, this world of private equity looks like a world of robber barons, and Romney comes out of that world."
A similar article that same month and year in The Boston Globe noted that Bain Capital specialized in leveraged buyouts and cited MIT Sloan School of Management professor Howard Anderson. Bain, he said, would do "everything they can" to increase the value of the companies it bought. "The promise [to investors] is to make as much money as possible. You don't say we're going to make as much money as possible without going offshore and laying off people."
Stephen Colbert may have summed it up best: "Mitt Romney knows just how to trim the fat. He rescued businesses like Dade Behring, Stage Stories, American Pad and Paper, and GS Industries, then his company sold them for a profit of $578 million after which all of those firms declared bankruptcy. Which sounds bad, but don't worry, almost no one worked there anymore."
Another of the companies sucked into Bain's gravitational pull was the medical testing firm Damon Corp. that, according to the Globe, “later pleaded guilty to defrauding the federal government of $25 million and paid a record $119 million fine.
"Romney sat on Damon's board. During Romney's tenure, Damon executives submitted bills to the government for millions of unnecessary blood tests. Romney and other board members were never implicated... But court records suggest that the Damon executives' scheme continued throughout Bain's ownership... Bain, meanwhile, tripled its investment. Romney personally reaped $473,000."
But unlike the companies it bought, at Bain itself, failure could be rewarded -- if your name was Mitt. Take a look at the sweetheart deal Romney got when he took over Bain Capital, a spinoff of consulting firm Bain & Company where he had been an executive. In an arrangement any start-up enterpriser would kill for, as per the Globe, founder Bill Bain guaranteed that if the Bain Capital experiment tanked, "Romney would get his old job and salary back, plus any raises handed out during his absence." What's more, if he proved unfit for the task, "Bain agreed to craft a cover story if necessary, promising to bring Romney back to the consulting firm and explain Romney's return as a matter of his being more valuable to Bain as a consultant."
Nice. No wonder Romney told an Iowa crowd this week that, "Corporations are people, my friend." Like Garrett Morris' Chico Escuela in the early days of Saturday Night Live, big business been berry berry good to him. Would that it had been berry berry good to the hundreds fired at companies taken over by Bain Capital.
Yes, corporate people power has served Romney well, especially when it comes to political fundraising. As Huffington Post reported this week, "According to disclosure reports filed at the end of July, 61 registered lobbyists and five lobbyist-linked political action committees contributed $137,650 to Romney's campaign between Jan. 1 and June 30, 2011. The former Massachusetts governor raised more money from lobbyists during this period than all of his competitors combined... Craig Holman, legislative representative for the watchdog group Public Citizen, told HuffPost that Romney's lead in lobbyist cash 'strongly suggests that Romney is the favored candidate for wealthy special interest groups, especially K Street. They clearly think that they can get their foot in the door with Mitt Romney.'"
Then there's this in the July 20 Washington Post: "The largest corporate sources of money for Romney are mostly finance industry leaders, including Morgan Stanley and Bank of America. Goldman Sachs employees have given nearly a quarter of a million dollars in contributions... The keys to his success appear to be large donors and contributors from the New York area. Nearly three-quarters of Romney's money came from donors giving the maximum $2,500 contribution, and one in eight of Romney's donors live in New York City and its suburbs." Of the $18 million raised by his campaign in the second quarter this year, one million came from a single trip to New York in May, including a University Club event crammed to its poshly appointed walls with banking executives.
So it's not surprising that in the Romney camp, the creative accounting techniques perfected by Wall Street are a specialty. It was again The Boston Globe -- which seems to have covered Romney's political ambitions since they first danced in his head -- that wrote back on April 15, "The former Massachusetts governor has become a master of a controversial but legal fund-raising technique that relies on a network of loosely regulated state political action committees to collect those funds."
Example: four members of the Marriott hotel family, close friends with the Romneys and fellow Mormons, wrote checks totaling $215,000 to Romney's campaign, far more than an individual is allowed to give to federal political committees. "Romney, more fully exploiting the system he employed in the 2008 election cycle, got around those restrictions by taking in contributions through political committees set up under the rules of individual states. Most of the money was then transferred to Romney's federal political action committee, Free and Strong America, and used to pay the salaries of top aides, political consultants, and traveling expenses."
Consider, too, the super PAC Restore Our Future, supposedly independent, but run by former Romney political aides in support of their man's candidacy. Restore Our Future raised $12.2 million in the first half of 2012. Under the new, relaxed rules it can raise unlimited funds but must disclose who contributes and cannot legally coordinate with the candidates themselves or the candidates' official campaign committees. Of Restore Our Future's 90 wealthy donors so far, the ubiquitous Marriotts among them, four gave a million dollars apiece. One was John Paulson, described by the website Politico as "a New York hedge fund billionaire who became famous for enriching himself by betting on the collapse of the housing industry."
The other three allegedly are corporations but none of them conduct any real business. Two, Eli Publishing and something called F8 LLC, each list the same Provo, Utah, address as trusts set up by the families of two executives at the anti-aging product company Nu Skin Enterprises. Nu Skin founders and fellow Mormons Stephen Lund and Blake Roney were big contributors to Romney's first White House campaign in 2008. (For what it's worth, twice in the nineties, Nu Skin was hauled before the Federal Trade Commission and paid a total of $2.5 million to settle allegations of unsubstantiated product claims.)
The other shell company, W Spann LLC, was even more mysterious. As first reported by Michael Isikoff of NBC News, it was dissolved only months after it was created, and just two weeks before Restore Our Future reported the company's donation. As Isikoff wrote, "Campaign finance experts say the use of an opaque company like W Spann to donate large sums of money into a political campaign shows how post-Watergate disclosure laws are now being increasingly circumvented."
After days of media demands and questions, the man behind W Spann finally came forward: Edward Conard, a retired managing director of -- surprise -- Bain Capital. But he only stepped up after the groups Democracy 21 and the Campaign Legal Center requested investigations by the Justice Department and the Federal Elections Commission. He made his donation "after consulting prominent legal counsel regarding the transaction," Conard said, "and based on my understanding that the contribution would comply with applicable laws."
Phony businesses set up for the sole purpose of laundering campaign money and shielding who's really behind massive contributions? The donors responsible for the dummy corporations all say they have noting to hide. So why hide it? Maybe to keep their distance, because Restore Our Future could be planning attack ads on Republican rivals and President Obama that will be harsher and more truth bending than anything Romney and his nearest and dearest can officially support.
We need to discover this and other answers before the money machine completely supplants the voting machine, and any last chance to have our voices heard is permanently stilled by cold hard cash.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


18 Comments so far
Show All"..the wealthy feeling the urge (and having the disposable income and free time).."
musing over why wealthy people so generously cough up tons of money as a campaign gift i wonder, "is it for the altruistic satisfaction of knowing they have gone the extra mile to promote democratic-capitalism?" the munitions industry, the financial & insurance industry, mass media, energy, big-pharma and corporate agricultural make up that 1% of 1% with "disposable" income. okay, i know that my evening news is for the most part sponsored by the munitions industry. (i refuse to use the term "defense industry" for aggressors) when the candidate buys ad time from the media, all those generous angels who own preferred stock get the "gift" retuned. also, when their congressional reps award contracts, we the tax payers return the "gift" many fold. we may speak of disposable income, but for those to whom money is more precious than life itself, there's no such thing as extra money.
"The difference between China and the US is, In China if you work you eat. If you don't work you don't eat. In the US,if you work you don't eat and, if you don't work,you eat" Mao Tse Dung
I give this post a c+
he has three quotes or so to support his main idea, which occur after several paragraphs of fluff (no real meat untill the 8th paragraph !!)
however, to earn an A, the author would have to substantiate the real charge - that Bain, and Gov Romney - profited by cutting jobs and taking pension money
that he fails to do is another missed opportuinity, a lazy left guy not doing a good job.
sad , probably have to wait for chomsky to do this
establishing the context of scale, election law changes, timeline, etc. for the point introduced by the author in paragraph 8 strikes me as standard journalistic practice by which a writer "earns" a living. The cutting of jobs was noted in the company acquisition strategy - I agree, any taking of pension money is a story I look forward to seeing reported
I really don't understand how anyone takes Romney seriously as a candidate, given his business record. All he's done is put Americans out of work while enriching himself, often in ethically questionable ways.
this article is about the lizard mitt but it more or less applies to the whole crew that we have in politics
who's past is more shrouded in mystery than von obummer's
who is more psychotic than billory
throw in a palin or two
begins to make mccain look statesman like
pawlenty - gingrich
rick perry
there is a real trend happening here
the one element of profile these clowns all share is that they are all deeply sociopathic and psychotic
there is a new field of science that begins - for the first time - to put into context and understand these very crazy and very evil people
it is called ponerology and it bears very close study
"the origin of evil actually lies outside the boundaries of the conventional worldview within which the earlier moral inquiries and literary explorations were conducted. Evil requires a truly modern and scientific approach to lay bare its secrets. This approach is called “ponerology”, the study of evil, from the Greek “poneros” = evil. "
http://ponerology.com/
Political Ponerology is a study of the founders and supporters of oppressive political regimes analyzing the common factors that lead to the propagation of man’s inhumanity to man. Morality and humanism cannot long withstand the predations of this evil. Knowledge of its nature – and its insidious effect on both individuals and groups - is the only antidote."
ibid
psychopaths gravitate into two main jobs:
1. politics
2. business
in romney we have the two-for-one scheme at work
about 5% of the gene pool is psychotic and of them 1 % are really dangerous - shout out to von obummer, clinton (either one), perry etc
They recognize each other in a crowd very quickly
"Imagine - if you can - not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken. And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools. "
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/152452-Political-Ponerology-A-Science-of-Evil-Applied-for-Political-Purposes
"Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless. You are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience that they seldom even guess at your condition. Your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences, will most likely remain undiscovered. "
ibid
see what i mean............
A very enjoyable post.
"psychopaths gravitate into two main jobs:
1. politics
2. business"
This comment really captures, in a few words, the source of most of the world's problems today.
Great post. Why do all psychopaths fit the definition of "conservative"?
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Society/Conservatives_Deconstruct.html
evil ~ live backwards
My take on this condition is, such people are "sociopaths". These would be people who can function mentally, yet have no normal empathy for others. This term has also been applied to such people as Jeffrey Dahmer. (You can google that name if needed.)
Mitt Romney has still not overcome the 'fortunate son' label that Mike Huckabee successfully put on him when the former Arkansas governor said that the Mittster 'looked like the guy who laid you off.' That script is tailor-made for Romney's rivals in the GOP race who come from modest backgrounds: Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann, and that narrative will be enthusiastically eaten up by the deluded tea bagger hordes, who prefer those whom manipulate them to vote against their own interests be perceived to be one of their own.
As Visiting Professor and medmedude point out, it is fatuous to single out one politician like Romney, even if he is an egregiously odious representative of his type. It gives the impression that Romney is different in kind, and not merely degree, from his competition in and out of his political party.
Politics has always been about the benjamins, from the original Benjamin's lifetime and before. But in our lifetime, and in plain sight, the traditional role of Amerikan politicians as "servants of We the People"-- problematic, even preposterous, as that conception may always have been-- has been phased out and replaced by politicians who openly and proudly function as an elite class of professional technocrats: managers or executives who are only nominally and tenuously connected to their constituencies of ordinary unprivileged citizens.
While superficially conducting, you should pardon the expression, "business as usual", national "political" institutions, executive, legislative, and judicial alike, have devolved into para-corporate service delivery systems-- a mega-mercantile exchange. Thus, politicians are like expert players in a private, high-stakes poker game.
Despite the fiction that they sit at the table as representatives of their constituencies, they're obviously principally playing for themselves. And it's inevitable that they should incline to alliances with the wealthy in various manifestations, and forgo loyalties and encumbrances that are less profitable.
The "quaint" trappings of civic life and the rhetoric of selfless patriotic service are preserved only because the populace is accustomed to them, and because of their increasingly vestigial validity on the state and local level; it's a case of the persistence of illusion.
The politicians themselves would likely deny or disclaim that it's significant, and no coincidence, that they are all essentially prosperous and generally wealthy businesspersons; I presume that individuals across the political/commercial range of the power elite are largely oblivious to this devolution; I expect that they would both stoutly affirm the supremacy of the nation-state and its time-honored mode of government, and deny that from the top down, the distinction between political and economic power has gradually and knowingly been abandoned and obliterated.
In the Amerikan Imperium, political campaigns and careers are expensive and high-maintenance. It takes money to afford the initial "cover charge"; the higher the office, the more astronomical the budget. Even those few professional politicians who eschew opulence and attempt to maintain a relatively modest personal lifestyle require constant infusions of big bucks to underwrite their careers.
Especially on the federal level, high office now requires each individual office-holder to function as a wholly-owned subsidiary, preoccupied with managing and enhancing money streams to guarantee that they'll keep their place in the Going Concern of politics.
Money and power: Mammon's own whirligig, his servants in its thrall.
One need not be a Christian to agree that "the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil", especially if "love of money" is understood to broadly mean "incessant need, or demand, for money" as a means to an end: political power.
And history has only vindicated Lord Acton's wise observation that "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men".
"""I often think of his sage words as I watch the early days of the 2012 political campaigns. For the phrase "buy you a yacht," simply substitute "buy you an election." Then behold the havoc wrought by Citizens United and other court decisions that have unleashed a mudslide of corporate cash into our electoral system, much of it anonymous, hurling the average citizen out of the democratic equation."""
*****************************************************
That is precisely what mitt the muffin meant when he said he would not play the straw poll game, instead, he would use his campaign money to 'obtain' his delegates. To be sure there are enough of those kind o slime ball delegates thinking themselves very worthy of that money.
I curse johnnie robbersum and his other 4 neoconservative henchmen for their treasonous decision that now, blatantly leaves the voters out of the part of democracy that should mean the most, chance to change the corruption of government. But there is NOTHING fair about being bought out for others agendas. I can only hope for an early demise for those 5 neoconservative justices or should I say an early debilitating illness that leaves them laying on their backs immobile for many years.
Anybody who thinks Tim Pawlenty would be an improvement, ought to look at how, in 8 years, Pawlenty dismantled the long extant progressive educational system in the state of Minnesota, and left the state with a large debt. Now with a Rethug legislature, only a Democratic governor is saving Minnesota from a Wisconsin style debacle.
Mitt Romney, rich as he is, will be swept aside by the unlimited Texas Oil money that will be at the disposal of Rick Perry. If it turns out that the fight is between NY financial $$$ combined with Mormonmoney against oil $$$, there's just no contest. In any case, a lot of NY money will sluice into Perry's campaign once they see he's a winner.
The other candidates are out of it, as Pawlenty admitted today.
I think Rick Perry is likely to play Reagan against Obama#s Carter, unless (stifled laughter) Americans suddenly become |grownups|
Look at it this way, as CounterPunch already does, at least this Tea Party president is going down to defeat by a landslide while we elect some real Democrats such as Norman Solomon as congressman in CA and others across this land. From now on in its a fight of attrition and a political guerrilla war which we can win.