iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
David Isenberg

GET UPDATES FROM David Isenberg
 

Take My Koch Brothers -- Please

Posted: 03/ 8/2012 12:14 pm

Please excuse the digression but for the first time since I started blogging for the Huffington Post in December 2009 I'm going to write about something other than private military and security contractors.

Perhaps some of you are aware of the recent kerfuffle between the CATO Institute, the Washington, D.C.-based libertarian think tank, and America's most famous sibling plutocrats -- oops, I mean revered billionaire success stories, the David H. and Charles G. Koch brothers. Yes, THOSE Koch brothers, the godfathers of Koch Industries.

Actually, in the interest of good vocabulary, this is more than a kerfuffle. Serious word experts agree that this could rise to the level of a row or ruckus -- possibly even an uproar. Maybe not as potentially catastrophic as, say, launching a future war of choice against a certain Persian country, but still serious -- especially for those few remaining Americans who think serious scholarship is necessary, even vital, for good policy.

In the past, the Koch brothers, in their voluntary role as the Johnny Appleseed funders (their motto: from little multimillion donation acorns mighty free market trees grow) of conservative and libertarian groups, and in more recent years, Tea Party types, have given money to such groups across America. How much money? LOTS of money; more than an estimated $100 million. Talk about putting your money where your mouthpieces are.

Like most people in recent years I've become more aware of the Koch brothers financial support of various right-wing causes but have never been overly concerned about it. I mean this is America. I'm pretty sure that when I served in the Navy one of the constitutional rights I was protecting was the right of plutocrats -- sorry, I mean descendants of successful capitalists -- to use their über riches to manipulate public opinion however they saw fit.

But when the news came out this past week that the Koch siblings had filed a lawsuit to take control of the CATO Institute, the nation's most prominent libertarian think tank, my ears perked up. I'll explain why momentarily, but first some background.

Although it was incorporated as a non-profit group, CATO is effectively owned by a board of shareholders. Until recently, this board consisted of Cato President and Founder Ed Crane, Charles Koch, David Koch, and the late William Niskanen, who died last October, each holding equal shares in the corporation.

According to the Kochs' complaint, when Niskanen died his shares should have been returned to the corporation, giving the Kochs majority control on the board of shareholders. Instead, the shares were transferred to his widow. The Koch brothers, doing their best to imitate Simon Legree, or perhaps Gordon Gecko, are suing her over stock she inherited worth $16.00.

The Kochs maintain their suit is simply about enforcing the shareholder agreement. The Washington Post quotes Charles Koch as saying, "We support Cato and its work. We want to ensure that Cato stays true to its fundamental principles of individual liberty, free markets, and peace into the future, and that it not be subject to the personal preferences of individual officers or directors."

But CATO's Crane and CATO Chairman Bob Levy charge the suit is about transforming Cato into a less independent and more political (if not also more partisan) institution. You can find Cato's view here.

The essence of CATO's charges against the Kochs is that they seek to take over CATO by packing the board with Koch supporters -- and they already control seven of our 16 board seats, two short of outright control -- thus transforming CATO into an intellectual ammo-shop for American for Prosperity and other allied (presumably, Koch-controlled) organizations.

By the way, given that the Koch brothers have long been the funding source that makes Republican party fundraisers go pitter-patter, am I the only one to see the irony that the brothers seem to be channeling the infamous "court-packing" scheme that Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt proposed when the Supreme Court was declaring much of his New Deal unconstitutional?

Now, the Koch brothers might be well intentioned. But as one commentator noted:

Many libertarian-leaning organizations receive money from the Kochs and their foundations and are attacked on this basis. Such attacks can be deflected, as financial support is not the same thing as control. But if the Koch brothers themselves represent the controlling majority of an organization's board, that organization is, by definition, a Koch-run enterprise. Progressive activists and journalists will have a field day with this. They will forevermore characterize the CATO Institute as "Koch-controlled" -- and, as a legal matter, they will be correct. No efforts to re-establish the Institute's credibility or independence will overcome this fact...

Even if one assumes that the Kochs have better ideas for how Cato should direct its resources, know more about how to advance individual liberty, and are correct that the Institute is too "subject to the personal preferences of individual officers or directors," any benefit from whatever changes they could make will be outweighed to the permanent damage to Cato's reputation caused by turning it into a de facto Koch subsidiary. In short, they will have destroyed the Cato Institute to save it.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure I have a loose but longstanding relation with CATO. Back in my student days I won first prize in their 1987 Foreign Policy essay contest. Since then I've written papers for CATO on various military and foreign policy issues. In 1999 it made me one of their adjunct scholars, the equivalent of being on a farm league sports team, which mostly means they refer reporters to me when its own scholars are too busy to take their questions. Since then I've written two papers for CATO spoke at one of its policy forums, and listed my affiliation with them on the pieces I've published elsewhere.

I don't agree with all of CATO's positions but on the issues we have in common, in the military and foreign policy sphere, I have long been impressed by both its scholarship and its passion.

Let's face facts. In Washington, D.C., where the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Entertainment (MICE) complex reigns supreme, it is the only top-ranked think tank willing to speak truth to power and say that America is better off being a republic, not an empire or Globocop. The rigorous scholarship and first-rate intellectual firepower it has brought to that task long ago earned my respect.

Personally, as a veteran, I like a group that thinks American soldiers, sailors, Marines, and pilots should be used just for defending American interests, not as the 911 emergency help line for the rest of the world.

I'm also old enough to remember a time when real American conservatives understood and agreed with that. But that was way back in the 20th century and this is now.

Still, the prospect that a CATO Institute controlled by the Koch brothers might be reduced to a shop producing talking points for political front groups like those conceived by the like of Karl Rove -- such as American Crossroads -- understandably induces angst. It's the equivalent of expecting the American Enterprise Institute to serve as the bat boy for Rush Limbaugh.

Given that some of the people the Koch brothers want to put on CATO's board are firmly in the neocon camp, one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to see that a Koch-controlled CATO Institute is one big win for unbridled militarism and one big setback for those advocating small government and individual liberty.

Note to the brothers: Other billionaire capitalists, like George Soros, seem to understand this so it can't just be your money that makes you blind on this point. Perhaps it is the fluoride in the water supply. If so, if you want to take over the American Dental Association, you have my support.

But in the meantime, to paraphrase that famous America political philosopher "Henny" Youngman, I think we should just say, "Take [away] the Koch brothers -- please."

 
 
 

Follow David Isenberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/vanidan

Please excuse the digression but for the first time since I started blogging for the Huffington Post in December 2009 I'm going to write about something other than private military and security contra...
Please excuse the digression but for the first time since I started blogging for the Huffington Post in December 2009 I'm going to write about something other than private military and security contra...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 48
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
victorianism
Theultrathinnothingnesshasabeautifulendforusall.
10:21 AM on 03/09/2012
The wording of this article is so awesome and so strikingly inspiritional. Thank you, dear David Isenberg!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ericinkw
Business is Good, People are Terrific
07:52 AM on 03/09/2012
The Koch brothers represent the very worst that American politics and influence has to offer. They intend to bully, manipulate, coerce, influence and bribe their way to the White House. It won't work. They want to throw $100 Million to these Super PACs, thinking that if they pay for enough clever commercials demonizing Obama, they'll sway an ignorant electorate into thinking that the Conservatives, who effectively collapsed our economy last time they were in control, know better. They do not. They don't even have a clue. Obama has the economy back on track, we are creating over 200,000 jobs monthly now and all leading economic indicators are trending UP, so what the Koch brothers do not realize is, Americans are asking themselves "Why would we want to go back to those same failed policies? That would be CRAZY."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
StillAmused
Some mayo on that troll, please...
06:01 AM on 03/09/2012
Personally, I've drawn great comfort from the clumsy, obvious and very visible moves by the Koch brothers. While the most dangerous plutocrats are smart enough to maintain a low profile, "work" their front groups and stay out of the news, these clowns bring their own china shop.

It strikes me that they're proudly assuming their place on the stage as one of the key players in the inexorable decline of the reactionary wing, overreaching and overplaying their hand at every opportunity.

If Karma delivers in November, they'll be prominent in the credit roll.

Every mobster knows it's bad policy to draw attention to yourself.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dave Dave
Be like water
11:10 PM on 03/08/2012
The Koch Brothers legacy is to delay the awakening to the dangers of global warming, disrupt union rights and other actions to protect their core industries and have expended hundreds of millions of their inherited fortune to do so.

Contrast this with what Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation with primary aims globally, to enhance healthcare and reduce extreme poverty, and in America, to expand educational opportunities and access to information technology.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ericinkw
Business is Good, People are Terrific
08:02 AM on 03/09/2012
So it's the Evil Greedy Capitalists who hoard their resources to rape, pillage & plunder the environment and quash individual liberties versus the charitable Philanthropists who are giving back to the society and the world that helped them get to where they are. Basically a microcosm of what Conservative Republicans represent versus Liberal Democrats who believe in Social Justice.
10:45 PM on 03/08/2012
One thing journalists and writers like yourself could do is start calling out the American Right and folks like Ron Paul and the Koch Brothers on their hijacking of the term Libertarian. In the rest of the world it means Left philosophies, most notably Anarchism. In the USA it has been used as a euphemism to sugar coat an agenda of Right Wing corporate laissez faire capitalism and a nostalgia for Jim Crow States Rights prior to the federal government's Civil Rights legislation in the 1960's.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ericinkw
Business is Good, People are Terrific
08:51 AM on 03/09/2012
There was a time, after having been a Republican under Reagan in the 80's, that I decided to try & embrace what I thought was Libertarian principles. I thought it stood for less government, free markets and individual liberties. It was different from the Republican Party in that it didn't try to control women's bodies, legislate what you could or couldn't do in the privacy of your own home, and it wasn't a Rich White Man's Club. What I didn't know was that it was a political Party in name only, with no real national leadership and no "In" with the national Press and no real political power to speak of because the system is gamed to include just the two main parties. Just because you call yourself a Libertarian doesn't mean you'll get the right to debate issues with the big boys on national TV. Our system is rigged, gamed to favor just the two parties, and until that changes, being a Libertarian is not only ineffectual, it's politically meaniningless in America.
09:27 AM on 03/09/2012
I agree with your observation of the American political system being stuck in a monopoly of the two major parties, and now one of the major parties, the party of Abraham Lincoln no less, has become captive of a movement of people who are still resentful that Lincoln beat the Confederacy in the Civil War.

I dont think the Libertarian movement in the US is really libertarian. It is like the Liberal Party in NY. It was not liberal at all, it was, actually, kind of right wing, and ultimately was a vehicle for its leader to cut the best corrupt deal for himself and his family in exchange for endorsing Republican Rudolph Giuliani for the NYC mayoralty. People who want to return the USA to the absence of any regulation on what large corporations can do to people and to the environment, and to a time when no one could tell the Southern States not to discriminate against out of state business competitors, let alone their own black citizens, need to find a name that accurately reflects what they are about. Because the euphemisms of Libertarian and Christian are growing thin.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OleProfessor
"Ours is not a system based upon trust"
10:37 PM on 03/08/2012
Let's try and remember that "nature abhors a vacuum."

Everyone that speaks of "less government", chooses mindlessly to forget that something will fill the gap of less government and that is more Corporate Tyranny..

Corporatism is the antecedent of Less Government..

Government implies consent...once Corporatism replaces the gap of less government consent goes along with it...

Zero consent just Corporate Tyranny, which is what the Koch Bros. are all about..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dave Dave
Be like water
10:56 PM on 03/08/2012
Very good points, Ole Professor....
photo
AlfredE69
Liberty Lovin' Tree Hugger
09:56 PM on 03/08/2012
Why did the Obama Administration try to get out of the Iraq withdrawal agreement? And why are US troops still in Afghanistan, I had no idea that they attacked the US?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Lee Harrington
I'd Love To Change The World..
01:04 AM on 03/09/2012
Osama Ben Laden did.....or can you remember back 11 years
photo
AlfredE69
Liberty Lovin' Tree Hugger
09:35 PM on 03/09/2012
Bin Laden is from Saudi Arabia.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Russell Masingale
weary I am of the Astroturf.
05:41 AM on 03/09/2012
surprised you use a picture with W in it. i thought you guys were trying to make his 8 years disappear so as never having to talk about them again?
photo
AlfredE69
Liberty Lovin' Tree Hugger
09:36 PM on 03/09/2012
I was never Bush Jr's supporter, nor am I a supporter of his family's good ally Obama.
photo
demisfine
Often correct, NEVER right.
09:43 PM on 03/08/2012
These men, because they have obscene wealth, think they can have everything and anything they want.
And if you don't let them have their way, they will buy their way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
p pitstop
It's like waiting for Godot...
07:25 PM on 03/08/2012
Where are the think-tanks in which common sense is the basis for their "thinking?"
photo
FirstSpeaker
Emergency nurse. Tu ne cede malis....
07:18 PM on 03/08/2012
Really, Cato has been compromised since Murray Rothbard was purged by the Kochs and Ed Crane years ago. Interstingly enough, Rothbard's family now holds his shares of the Cato Institute. I wonder why the author didn't mention this aspect of the story.
04:40 PM on 03/08/2012
I no longer know what nation it is in which I live. Why did so many of my relatives fight and die in every war since the Revolutionary War, if bickering amongst the Plutocracy is now the microcosm-metaphor for the Republic itself?
photo
LIBIntOrg
Mother Libertarian Organization
04:17 PM on 03/08/2012
Thanks for the article. CATO is a Libertarian-oriented entity working on limited government themes. Many of its proposals, such as flat taxes, are inconsistent with strict voluntary Libertarian solutions.

For info on people using voluntary Libertarian tools on similar and other issues, please see http://​www.Libertarian-Internation​al.org , the non-partisan Libertarian International Organization, which is strictly volunteer and neither donates nor accepts money.
03:42 PM on 03/08/2012
The author uses the term "scholars" loosely in this article. the CATO Institute "Scholars" believe that global warming is a hoax which is all you really need to know. see here: http://www.cato.org/global-warming Bear in mind the Koch brothers' fortune is built on oil refinement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_brothers

keep the quality stories coming huffpo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aneesia
03:09 PM on 03/08/2012
Time for the 99ers to take action and stop the final assault on our freedoms. The weather's good and it's time to attack.
photo
MED1025
Here to save the day
03:08 PM on 03/08/2012
Isn't it ironic that 2 men who inherited their wealth have a problem with a woman who inherited shares of an institute?