This morning's op-ed in the New York Times by Goldman Sachs exec (or should I say, ex-Goldman exec) Greg Smith is turning heads and has the financial world abuzz. The truth-telling about a change in culture within the investment bank away from one that is client-centered towards one that is money-centered appears directly aimed at the vampire squid's soul, if it has one left.
There are easy comparisons to make between Smith's piece about the internal culture at Goldman and our money-drenched political system. Smith recounted colleagues describing clients as "muppets" as they sold them products they didn't need. Lobbyist Jack Abramoff called his Indian tribes "monkeys" and "troglodytes." One secret to get ahead at Goldman? Trade any "opaque product with a three-letter acronym." In Washington, super PACs, c4s and 527s are the modern tools of the trade for politicians and operatives alike.
More than anything else, Smith's unflinching take-down of the unethical turn at Goldman to serve themselves rather than their clients was what struck me.
Our political system functions in exactly the same way. In fact, Goldman execs and its PAC have donated nearly $5.8 million to federal candidates and committees in the last two election cycles and has spent close to $9 million on lobbying in the last two years. That should come as no surprise given the nexus between Wall Street and Washington has been well-documented. Below are just a small number of examples from the last few days.
- Yesterday, National Journal reported that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was spending hours each night on the phone calling big money donors to prepare for his re-election -- which is three years away. McConnell, who self-identifies as the Darth Vader of campaign finance reform, already has amassed a war chest bursting at6 million.
So who can blame voters for believing that politics and elections are owned by the moneyed few? With new laws in dozens of states limiting the ability of as many as 5 million Americans to cast ballots coupled with deregulation of the financing of our federal elections all but completed, what's a voter to do?
Perhaps we need more Greg Smith-type truth-telling from those who have lived in the belly of the beast on Wall Street and in Washington. That'd be a good start. But while one person leaving with a kiss-and-tell story salves his or her conscience, it doesn't alter structural imbalances. An op-ed is not a campaign. The truth is, in politics, muckraking out the corruption is only half the story. We need new laws, like the Fair Elections Now Act, that help to lessen the impact of money-in-politics by attacking corruption and by increasing participation.
Goldman won't change its ways because of an op-ed and the political system won't change with one expose. That's in part because we're never going to get all the money out just like we'll never remove greed or profit-seeking from Wall Street. The essential challenge before us is getting everyday Americans invested in our democracy, and making voters and their votes the coin in the realm of American elections, not donors and their dollars.
How will Donald Trump’s first 100 days impact YOU? Subscribe, choose the community that you most identify with or want to learn more about and we’ll send you the news that matters most once a week throughout Trump’s first 100 days in office. Learn more