Watching what's happening to our democracy is like watching the cruise ship Costa Concordia founder and sink slowly into the sea off the coast of Italy, as the passengers, shorn of life vests, scramble for safety as best they can, while the captain trips and falls conveniently into a waiting life boat.
We are drowning here, with gaping holes torn into the hull of the ship of state from charges detonated by the owners and manipulators of capital. Their wealth has become a demonic force in politics. Nothing can stop them. Not the law, which has been written to accommodate them. Not scrutiny -- they have no shame. Not a decent respect for the welfare of others -- the people without means, their safety net shredded, left helpless before events beyond their control.
The obstacles facing the millennial generation didn't just happen. Take an economy skewed to the top, low wages and missing jobs, predatory interest rates on college loans: these are politically engineered consequences of government of, by, and for the one percent. So, too, is our tax code the product of money and politics, influence and favoritism, lobbyists and the laws they draft for rented politicians to enact.
Here's what we're up against. Read it and weep: "America's Plutocrats Play the Political Ponies." That's a headline in "Too Much," an Internet publication from the Institute for Policy Studies that describes itself as "an online weekly on excess and inequality."
Yes, the results are in and our elections have replaced horse racing as the sport of kings. Only these kings aren't your everyday poobahs and potentates. These kings are multi-billionaire, corporate moguls who by the divine right, not of God, but the United States Supreme Court and its Citizens United decision, are now buying politicians like so much pricey horseflesh. All that money pouring into super PACs, much of it from secret sources: merely an investment, should their horse pay off in November, in the best government money can buy.
They're shelling out fortunes' worth of contributions. Look at just a few of them: Mitt Romney's hedge fund pals Robert Mercer, John Paulson, Julian Robertson and Paul Singer -- each of whom has ponied up a million or more for the super PAC called "Restore Our Future" -- as in, "Give us back the go-go days, when predators ruled Wall Street like it was Jurassic Park."
Then there's casino boss Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam, fiercely pro-Israel and anti-President Obama's Mideast policy. Initially, they placed their bets on Newt Gingrich, who says on his first day in office he'd move the American Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, a decision that would thrill the Adelsons, but infuriate Palestinians and the rest of the Muslim world. Together, the Adelsons have contributed ten million to Newt's "Winning Our Future" super PAC.
Cowboy billionaire Foster Friess, a born-again Christian who made his fortune herding mutual funds instead of cattle, has been bankrolling the "Red White and Blue Fund" super PAC of Rick Santorum, with whom he shares a social right-wing agenda. Dark horse Ron Paul has relied on the kindness of PayPal founder Peter Thiel, a like-minded libertarian in favor of the smallest government possible, who gave $900,000 to Paul's "Endorse Liberty" super PAC. Hollywood's Jeffrey Katzenberg has so far emptied his wallet to the tune of a cool two million for the pro-Obama super PAC, "Priorities USA Action."
President Obama -- who kept his distance from Priorities USA Action and used to call the money unleashed by Citizens United a "threat to democracy" -- has declared if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. He urges his wealthy supporters to please go ahead and back the super PAC. "Our campaign has to face the reality of the law as it stands," his campaign manager Jim Messina said. To do otherwise, he added, would be to "unilaterally disarm" in the face of all those Republican super PAC millions. So much for Obama's stand on campaign finance reform -- everybody else is doing it, he seems to say, so why don't you show me the money, too?
When all is said and done, this race for the White House may cost more than two billion dollars. What's getting trampled into dust are the voices of people who aren't rich, not to mention what's left of our democracy. As Democratic pollster Peter Hart told The New Yorker magazine's Jane Mayer,
It's become a situation where the contest is how much you can destroy the system, rather than how much you can make it work. It makes no difference if you have a 'D' or an 'R' after your name. There's no sense that this is about democracy, and after the election you have to work together, and knit the country together.These gargantuan super PAC contributions are not an end in themselves. They are the means to gain control of government -- and the nation state -- for a reason. The French writer and economist Frederic Bastiat said it plainly: "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it." That's what the Super PACs are bidding on. For the rest of us, the ship may already have sailed.
Watch complete episodes of Bill Moyers' new show Moyers & Company, as well as more web-original essays, interviews, and interactive features at BillMoyers.com.
Follow Bill Moyers on Twitter: www.twitter.com/BillMoyers
Ari Berman: The .000063% Election
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
And she will continue to be lost until the people of this nation come to their senses and demand change ---a real change. That real change has to begin with a constitutional amendment overturning the hideously despicable United States Supreme Court majority opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
The Citizens United decision legalizes manipulation by corporations and enormously wealthy individuals, to very effectively articulate and control public policy in this nation by corrupting the national electoral process by use of their almost unimaginable wealth.
It is unfathomable that those 5 blind fools on the Supreme Court failed to see the corrupting potentiality of their decision.
American public policy has now been handed over to some 500 or fewer individuals and corporate entities, to literally rule this country and "government of, by, and for the people" is forever gone so long as Citizens United remains the law of this land.
America we have a problem.
And, it does appear the ship has sailed.
I wish I had known sooner.
I am sorry I didn't pay more attention.
I simply don't know what to do.
It seems no one is going to going to be able to stop this waste of money being spent - money we give with low taxes, loopholes and refunds to profitable companies. Money we taxpayers give to break our own democratic system?
I think u are right, barring some miracle, the ship is sinking.
What seems to confuse most is the power of freedom. Ask someone if they should have the freedom to do what they want with "their money" and they will shout... Heck yeah! Ask 'em if that freedom includes using money to take away someone else's notion of freedom and then things get wobbly.
We're not very good at understanding or deciding what's good or fair for society. Each person's notion of good and fair is completely different. We've used Sky-Gods, divine leaders, warriors, generals, dictators, scholars, sages and shaman. Healthy democracy allows each and everyone to voice their opinion and act. It's one of the better methods we've got for guiding society. Un-checked money is a thumb on the scale. It provides privilege for the few that have more money at their disposal. Like they say follow the money. Money isn't free speech. Money is the energy. Fortunately there are other energies that can manifest to eventually balance unchecked money energy.
Mr. Moyer's & Company are raising excellent questions and awareness about this big hot mess we got going on lately. He does't scream or carry on like a cable television carnival barker. His approach is more contemplative. His return to PBS is a blessing.
Ban Super Pacs, regular Pacs and any/all donations or contributions to any specific political candidate, group or cause over $100. Contributions to the cost of politics can be unlimited, but all such $$ goes into a pot that is shared equally by all legitimate candidates, defined as anyone that gathers an appropriate # of support signatures (depending on whether the race is local, State or National).
Hopefully, if politicians are answerable only to how they govern, we can move closer to our democratic ideals.
But Bill, guess who the single largest contributors to political campaigns are? Labor Unions!!! And they outspend Wall Street by almost 2 to 1. And lets not forget big oil and AARP and the list goes on and on. Are there members of the 1% that seek to influence politics for their own benefit? Of course there are, but they are not alone.
In an open economic system, there is always going to be a trend to inequality. There will always be a 1%!!! Lets worry less about that and more about sensible policies for necessary things that the capitalist system does not do well, like saftey nets and regulatory regimes. Let the market take care of the rest. This means you will have wild success, but also miserable failure. The system doesn't work without both.
Yes, but safety nets and regulations eminently necessary under the harshness of the system are the targets for elimination through incessant obstructive tactics by the political lapdogs for our Plutocracy. are they not? The free marketeers actually want no regulations nor standards of quality and safety but the freedom to produce what and how they will and let the customer through competition determine the future of those products. Worse, the system itself is based on the premise that all citizens must fend for themselves in a predator Darwinian society in which government is virtually absent, except of course to quell dissenting marches and demonstrations at home and to protect the plutocrats' corporate investments overseas which may involve wars to bring our freedoms to those huddled masses who "coincidentally" live in countries with strategic minerals.
In fact, it has the rather compelling benefit of generating the most efficient allocation of resources overall. However, as a society that is not always our goal. We believe there should be safety and shared access to infrastructure, equal opportunity, reasonably clean, hazard free living and working conditions. Government needs to be able to allocate resources to these things because we know the free market is not terribly good at it.
And by "we" I mean most citizens. Even those who lean libertarian are typically not at the fringe of "do away with all government." Far more common is "get me my piece fo government." The energy industry wants tax subsidies for E&P but no tax on carbon production. Agriculture wants protected domestic markets and land subsidies. Heavy industries want accelerated depreciation. The list goes on and on.
So again, I agree, lets get rid of the money, the lobbying and the vested interests, whether they are private equity firms, oil companies, pension funds or labor unions. And then lets have a reasonable debate, where it is OK to disagree, about how much government we need to make the society we want - and can realistically afford - work, and let the democratic process generate the leadership to implement the result.
Regardless of what happens this year, my data is for the period 1989 to 2009, where labor unions gave close to $500 million vs roughly $200 million for the investment industry. This did not include Teacher's Unions which gave an additional $50+ million nor did it include Insurance, Real Estat and Housing on the finance side which add another $150 million or so.
The source of the data is Anthony Davis at Dusquesne University, www.open secrets.org.
Look at what is happening in Greece now, our country is in just as bad shape and we are closer to collapse than anyone will acknowledge. but, really, who cares?
Who?
Here's a cute commercial with Nancy Pelosi showing this: Stop Colbert: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLH0fT3mbe0
So while Obama is right that it would be foolish for them to not use Super PACs themselves to fight those who are using them without shame, Democrats are actually admitting they are bad and trying to do something about them. But the 1% has a lot of money to throw into lobbying against that, and a lot of gullible Fox News viewers willing to be their pawns.
Because you and Bill keep telling them they are powerless to do anything because money controls everything!!!!!!
Stop blaming money and hold voters accountable and maybe they'll get up off the couch and vote!!!
So you should ask, "What are these donors to the super PACs expecting?"
More importantly, ask yourself, "What are the candidates promising to do for these donors to get their money?"
When I donated to Obama, I expected Obama to win election with it and then lead the country in a way I liked, for instance. Is there something wrong with that?
This Election is being stolen right now everyday while Americans are distracted !!!!!!!!!
Considering we live in a republic, that's kind of misleading.
It's opacity that throws the process overboard, not money. You'll not eliminate money unless you eliminate money as a medium of exchange.
Finally if the process is being thrown overboard, why is Mr. Santorum going toe-to-toe with big money on a shoestring?