Get Money Out: Making Waves

Three years ago, I left my 15-year career as a financial professional, because I was disgusted and disturbed by the rampant evidence of corruption in the relationship between our banking system and our government.

At the time the Tea Party was emerging and I was confident that between their exploding wave of anger and our newly minted president's soaring aspirations for all of us -- we would align to confront and resolve the blatantly corrupt relation ship between banking and our government and more broadly BUSINESS and STATE.

I was sure that the obviously aligned interests of Obama's constituents combined with the Tea Party's libertarian dogmas about money and government, that rigorous bank reforms in simple, fair and transparent way would follow. And more importantly, I believed Obama's energy and the Tea Parties would align to separate BUSINESS and STATE in order bar banks, or any other special interest from corrupting policy in a way that breaches fundamental fairness in our nation and prevents adaptation in a time of rapid change.

Their combined wave of energy was magnificent. Obama, scintillating and inspiring, harnessing a digital wave and the Tea Party, raw and rebellious screaming in unison: "We're not going to take this any more!"

Little to none of this happened and I was wrong. And I feel I must do something about it.

As it turns out, I'm not alone. In just five days, 80,000 of us have signed a petition to get money out of politics. To make this happen, we will need to grow this movement, and that starts with your voice.

When we hit 100,000 signers, we're going to do a special show on getting money out of politics from Washington DC, deliver our 100k signatures to Congress and issue what we call a "High Surf Alert." Attached to the high surf alert will be a link to a 3-paragraph letter from all of us explaining that we have signed this petition with the intent to send it to others.

This way we can harness the wave to grow our effort, lest we waste it on a bought and paralyzed government. When we are bigger we can then direct our attention at them.

I want explain to my viewers why we feel so strongly about this.

You can tell me your story in one of two ways. One, click here and leave a comment on why you want to get money out or two, film yourself talking about GetMoneyOut.com, put it on YouTube and send it to [e-mail]. I will use these video clips and stories on my show. I want people to see that it's not just me, that there are hundreds of thousands of us, millions of us, with one message: Get. Money.Out.

After 3 years of doing my best to marshal resources with dozens of impassioned collaborators to highlight obvious corruptions and solve problems together on TV, in person and on the Internet -- I found it doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks or does about a given policy idea -- because the entire media, and the two-party political apparatus that sets the debate is being funded by a relatively narrow group of major interests and any solution that threatens those funders is simply never discussed.

While our healthcare, educational, banking, military, energy, trade and tax policies all have great room for improvement, I believe that the events of the past few years make it clear that until we get money out of our political system, we cannot begin on any of it.

I recently learned that 94% of the time the candidate that raises the most money wins. Policy, race, gender, tie color... voice. Age all can be ignored in a candidate because -- 94% of the time the candidate that raises the most money wins.

So this past weekend when I saw the Occupy Wall Street/Occupy America protests spontaneously erupting in 60 cities, as the New York protestors heading into their 3^rd week -- I decided to walk over Friday evening to Zuccoti Park to see what they were doing.

I live 5 blocks away and worked 2 blocks from the square they are in for years, this Friday was one of my first trips back to that street corner in years and I was both fearful and excited to see what was going on. I have also never been to a protest like this.

On the Internet it said their message is this:

"Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%."

They said they we non-violent, had a policy of no drugs or alcohol in the Park, and didn't allow bullhorns or amplifiers of any kind -- they communicate by repeating out loud a given speakers words in short sentences. The short sentence requirement for speakers (not easy for me!!) has the duel benefit of keeping speeches short  -- and avoids that being "talked at" feeling that can result from electrical speech amplification.

When I arrived Friday there was a boisterous crowd in good spirits from all walks of life -- the hippies, young people and Tea Partiers I expected -- the old ladies and local lawyers I was encouraged to see as evidence for this groups broader appeal.

I was able to talk to different groups over a few hours and it was clear that we were in agreement. Our government is bought, and we need to do something about it. In fact, you don't have to go to Zuccoti Park or any other protest to know that!

Unrelated to any of these protests, we have started this petition to get money out. We have done so because we all agree, that until we do so, we will be prevented from engaging in the debate we all desperately need on virtually every issue to end this corruption.

I wanted them to know that I agree with them and that I support their principle, to learn from them and share with them my own efforts.

I asked on Friday if I could return the next day, Saturday, to address their General Assembly in their unusual speak and repeat fashion in Zuccoti Park. They told me if I came back the next day and signed up at 630 I could secure 5 minutes, I did so and a few hours later was granted time to speak.

Here is what I told them:

Dylan at Occupy Wall St by Dylan Ratigan

 

"My name is Dylan.  I live five blocks from here.  I think you people are crazy.  I love the way you communicate. The world has noticed your voice.  You have been here for three weeks, and you should be very proud of what you have accomplished.  For fifteen years I worked as a financial services professional. Have you guys said that yet? I can't believe I'm here talking to you.  I'm here because I agree with you. I made the decision three years ago to leave the financial services industry.  I did that because it was clear that the financial services industry was purchasing both political parties.  I believe that the fundamental problem with our collective desire to demand the debate America deserves is that both of our political parties are funded by well-heeled individuals, because they are bought.  So I have been asking myself what the hell I'm going to do about this.  I have decided that I am going to devote all of my resources, whatever those resources may be, with the knowledge that the decision to devote resources is much more important than what your resources are.  I believe that you and every other group of people who know for a fact that the government is bought and are making the decisions to make 2012 the year our voice will be heard.  I ask myself -- what do I do with my voice?  I look at myself like an angry villager.  I am irate. I know that if I cannot harness my personal rage for positive change I will harm myself and not help anybody else.  My question to myself has been how do I harness fire in myself?  You can either burn yourself in the town square or you can deliver a single a message to your government.  My message is that the government is bought.  If we do not separate business and state, and harness this energy to make that the central mission of this years' election we cannot begin to do the work we have to do.  Thank you for giving me some of your time and congratulations on your success. "

I agree with their principle, I don't know what will become of their movement, but I know I want to help them because I agree with them. I also agree with Ron Paul, Lawrence Lessig's #rootstrikers and millions of other disgusted and disenfranchised American's who know that their government is bought and are mad as hell about it.

In fact I think the singular message of ending our corrupt government function and the money that changes hands to facilitate it is the one goal almost every shares. Not surprisingly our efforts at aligning in a world of divisive issues makes us an underdog. Last week Politico described our effort like this:

"MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan is bent on banning money from political campaigns through a constitutional amendment, which is about as likely as the Cubs winning the World Series the night lightning twice strikes a massive earthbound asteroid."

But I believe if we approach the disparate communities with humility and shared principle, and a narrow focus, from Occupy Wall Street to factions of the Tea Party and beyond  -- to offer support, debate and learning, we have in 2012 our best chance yet to end the blatantly corrupt relationship between BUSINESS and STATE.

The battle for me it has how best harness all the fire that I feel for actionable positive change.

Since I devoted myself to this issue of about how blatantly corrupt our government has become --  I feel I have tried three methods to resolve it:

1. Scream! -- It felt good to express myself, but I found it to be an intense energy that alienated people with no positive harness to direct it.

2. Fight!  -- This also felt good, but rarely led to any resolution or positive action.

Or 3. -- Help! Convert that rage into action everyday FOR something that is based on broad principle with a narrow goal.

I believe our decision to form this petition and use our voice to demand a real debate about an Amendment to get Money Out of politics in 2012 gives all of us something to be FOR --  and a tool that can do it. We may agree to nothing, but can we all agree to do this.

 

Follow Dylan Ratigan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DylanRatigan

Comments

[Craig Clevidence]

04:26 PM on 10/09/2011

Two months ago, the organization Renew Democracy invited Dylan Ratigan and his viewers via his website to visit and consider supporting our proposed constitutional amendment designed to empower the American voter, guarantee their constitutional right to vote, and to provide a constitutional framework for campaign finance that would simply and effectively eliminate the overweening influence of organizations and special-interest groups and the political parties in the political process. We also invited other commentators on the MSNBC network through their e-mails at that time.

Here is the Renew Democracy Amendment or RDA that we propose on the site http://www.renewdemocracy.org

The right of the individual qualified citizen voter to participate in all pertinent local, state, and federal elections shall not be questioned and the right to vote is limited to individuals. The right to contribute to political campaigns and political parties is held solely by individual citizens. Political campaign contributions shall not exceed an amount reasonably affordable by the average American. The rights of all groups, associations and organizations to other political speech may be regulated by Congress but only as to volume and not content and only to protect the right of the individual voter’s voice to be heard.

You can sign up to support our amendment and become a part of our movement here: http://www.renewdemocracy.org/support

[Erik Jay]

04:09 PM on 10/14/2011

So I can't partner with four of my friends to do something as a group, eh? Oh, my, that would be a CORPORATION ... which, last I checked, were not populated by hyenas, as is the typical college faculty. Get money out of politics? What do you think "money" is? It's a medium of exchange, not a magical talisman. Americans spend more on potato chips than on all elections at all levels combined. Money isn't the problem, and lobbying and all the rest is driven SOLELY by the fact that the government and its minions have lots of favors to sell (check the economics textbooks, the introductory kind even, for a discussion of "rent seeking"). If the freakin' government weren't so big, powerful, and ubiquitous, then people -- whether individually or as corporations, of two or 22,000 -- would not be lining up to buy the privileges and perks that are on sale. Taking "money" out of "politics" is ludicrous, another control trip redounding only to the benefit of elites and their allies. Take the money out of Washington, D.C. -- better idea by far.

[pscherer]

05:19 PM on 10/07/2011

At least make public who is contibutiing to whom and who goes to work for whom after they leave public office. I do not think that corporate shareholders should be without a fair voice. I am not as sympathetic to CEOs. I do not believe that corporations are people. I do beleive that corporations are made up of people, but many of the people who work for a corporation have no or little voice in what that corporation does or stands for. I think that our media has degraded in its coverage of political issues and in general. Reality TV has nothing to do with my reality, thank God. Too often all we hear about are horse race analysis. Who is ahead by a nose. No one gives a shit about this because all the politicians are bought off. It is just a silly distraction. Just run a line on the bottom of the screen with poll numbers and instead spend your time talking about real issues. The American people are fed up with the Democrats, the Republicans, the coporate powers and The Supreme Court, and the media. These institutions simply do not get the fact that they human race and the planet is in trouble. Even the fundamental Christians understand that. The American people do not want more circuses and they want bread that is honestly made and not the product of Wall Street casino capitalism, slave labor overseas nor financial feudalism.

[Jerry Critter]

09:56 PM on 10/07/2011

Corporate shareholders already have a fair voice just like the rest of us. They can contribute their own money.

[pscherer]

11:51 PM on 10/07/2011

Correct. I am just saying that I am not out to demonize anyone and that employees of corporations may not have it as good as is sometimes portrayed. Remember Enron, for example. As for contributing money in order to get one's point of view across as a right of free speech, I am not super behind Judge Scalia on this. An alternative might be to be convinced by the beauty of the message or the logic. This begs the question of the effectiveness of sound bits and marketing in general as a way to solve problems proactively or set out a plan to do that. We could also talk about Sparta versus Athens since Socrates seems to be making a resurgence, hopefuly anyway. Other thoughts, perhaps the JOBS, JOBS, JOBS mantra actually refers, at least in part, to the likes of Steve Jobs and the fact that we need more scientist/artist/innovators like him. This begs the looking back to Ben Franklin. Although he was a pre-eminent capitalist, he invented/suppported libraries, fire departments, a publicly owned post office and believed in good journalism including letters written by THE SONS OF LIBERTY. the man who shot Liberty Valance did it because he wanted to let his girlfriend learn who to read.

[dwneastchk]

08:41 AM on 10/07/2011

Why isn't this Randi Rhodes petition since she is he one who started talking about it first?

And why is MSNBC suddenly trying to jump out in front of Keith Olbermann, when they ignored this story for weeks - until Keith reported it on Current TV first?

And what's this stuff about trying to get people to petition for Dylan Ratigan to be moved up to prime time.? I don't like listening to him.

In fact, the only one left I do watch is Rachel Maddow - and Ed Schultz, but moreso on his radio show in my car long with Randi Rhodes wherever I am.

[Phed Up]

09:55 PM on 10/09/2011

Dylan started talking about this on his show, got some guy to write the amendment and put it out there, in cyberspace. Randi Rhodes could have done the same thing but obviously didn't.

[Jerry Critter]

05:23 PM on 10/06/2011

Do you have a reference for the statistic that the one who raises the most money wins 94% of the time?

[bereasonable0]

04:31 PM on 10/06/2011

This does not make sense. Yes we need reform but this seems to disable any ability to organize and it would seem only those with the means to campaign would be candidates. That leaves us with the same cast of characters, professional politicians. Lobby reforms is an area where we could clean up more effectively. Legislative reforms in the form of changing the rules of congress might server us well too. Bills need to be written in clear language and reviewed publicly with the same review process used by engineering professionals. Line by line no oration that drifts off topic or speaks to high level ideals. Review the bill, amend the bill, vote on the bill. No tactics, no games, no BS. Everyone take an oath to tell the truth at the start of each day. If intentionally lie, you get fined. It's all theater on the hill and that is why we can't move forward.

[Marilyn Garcia]

09:13 PM on 10/05/2011

In 1976, Barbara Jordan at the Democratic Convention gave a speech in which she said, "This is the great danger America faces: that we will cease to be one nation and become instead a collection of interest groups......If that happens, who then will speak for American?"

[KenArnold]

08:25 PM on 10/05/2011

Is buying and displaying a bunch of bumper stickers or yard signs indirectly contributing on behalf of a candidate? Does that become unconstitutional and a Federal crime? How about paying newphew to put up a website for your choice for Congress?
We need reform - BIG TIME - but this amendment as written isn't it. Hope Dylan will work toward a realistic and effective one.

[KenArnold]

06:42 PM on 10/05/2011

I couldn't agree more. We most definately need political reform, elimination of corporate money from politics and an end to rent-seeking and corporate welfare.
However, Sadly, I see your amendment as poorly written and more problematic than helpful.
By omitting all sources of money yet saying nothing of in-kind contributions or providing for any oversight of mass media, it leaves candidate access even more in the hands of corporate-owned and controlled media. Political forces long ago drove the price of radio stations beyond any economic justification because they could be used to influence political opinion. We have one mega-network functioning as a political force greater than any of the political parties and most of the other networks follow suit and, with minor but significant exceptions (some of MSNBC programming), tow the line of their corporate owners and sponsors. Without provisions for public financing and media access, this leaves politics to those able to self finance (depending upon interpretation of the amendment) and those favored by the gatekeepers of our mass media. Further it says nothing of contributions to parties or expenditures for issue advocacy which has been and can be used as attacks against or support for candidates without clearly or directly identifying them. I would support the amendment if individual contributions were still allowed but also allowed to be limited in size by law or if it required a public campaign financing scheme that somehow was tied to public/popular support of the candidates.

[OldTulsan]

10:27 PM on 10/04/2011

http://www.getmoneyout.com/
Get Money Out

"...100,534 signatures..."

[wizeanne]

09:59 PM on 10/04/2011

Excellent article! Kudos Mr. Ratigan for your efforts to get the money out of politics. You're fighting an extremely wealthy and powerful elite cartel that not only "OWNS" the banks but are exact people who set up the PRIVATE Federal Reserve Banking System Ben Bernanke is Chairman for. This elite 1% percent own every major corporation and in every Presidency since Truman have infiltrated the staff and cabinets of every President. This elite cartel has no loyalty to Republican or Democrat candidates and only give us, the 99%, an illusion we have a choice to elect our President and Congressmen/women in Washington. I agree with you 100% getting money out is absolutely necessary...but it is going to take more than cutting off their money to politicians to follow these elite cartels influence off in every facet of our society, that only benefits "them" financially.

I'm with your "Get the Money Out!" It's a major start! Thank you for all your hard work. Hopefully, the American people...the 98%....suffering at the hands of the 1%..the powerful elite cartel destroying our economy to follow their agenda for a world globalization, will "wake up" and let their voices be heard. This must be stopped or we will end up an Oligarch or Monarchy and our Republic of the United States of America will be lost forever. March on protesters...we hear your voices.

[Mr Hankey]

04:29 PM on 10/04/2011

So why isn't anyone talking about Buddy Roemer? Especially Conservatives?
If you are a true Democrat, or lean Left, then I can understand why you wouldn't vote for Roemer, BUT I still think we should be talking about him. What Mr. Ratigan is talking about is what Roemer is campaigning on.

http://www.buddyroemer.com/issues/

"Issues

Fighting Special Interests
The corrupting influences that special interests have over our political system have never been stronger. Politicians in Washington, D.C. are completely beholden to these special interest groups to fund their political campaigns. It is time that someone stands-up against the power of the big checks, the bundled checks and the corporate checks."

[OldTulsan]

08:37 PM on 10/04/2011

http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/11/0920/Roemer.html
Presidential Candidate Buddy Roemer Picks Up The 'Fair' Trade Mantle -- With China Being His Chief Focus

"The 2012 race to the presidency suddenly has one candidate involved who is picking up where the great sucking sound of Ross Perot left off.

Buddy Roemer, former governor of Louisiana and member of Congress from 1981 to 1988, is the new darling of the "fair" trade community, having announced his Republican candidacy for president on July 27.

Roemer, a graduate of the Harvard Business School, got into the race because he believes the U.S. economy will fall off a cliff if the federal government doesn't address the most important economic issue of the time: unfair trade that is destroying the U.S. manufacturing sector. "The global free trade experiment has been tried and has proved to be a disaster to our economy," he says. "I am the only presidential candidate that is talking the truth about global free trade."

As founder and head of Business First Bank, a small business community bank for the past 16 years, Roemer has watched as his American industrial clients have been wiped out by Chinese competition. In his first speech on how to restore jobs, Roemer said that no other candidate for president either has the insight or the guts to recognize what has gone wrong with the American economy. They have all been bought off by corporations and bankers..."

[Poppa70]

01:44 AM on 10/10/2011

Good post! People need to look at what Buddy Roemer is saying.

[Snerdgronk]

03:37 PM on 10/04/2011

Look, the arrests of the peaceful OWS folks, is just co(R)po(R)ate 'people' protecting themselves from citizen 'people' .... !

In this 'War of the Democracies', the buck stops where all them other bucks (R) ...

Snerd

[AlexandriaCynic]

03:14 PM on 10/04/2011

Corporations are made-up of people. Employees and shareholders. But the decisions about what they do (like buying politicians) are not made by the employees or the shareholders but by a vanishingly small number of executives who make bundles of money for themselves when the bought-and-paid-for politicians pass laws favorable to them. It's way past time to take money out of politics.

[muck-raker]

04:08 PM on 10/04/2011

agreed, it is time for Public financing. When the likes of Gold in Sacks "donates" (bribes) Mr. Obama with 1.6 mil. and then when he becomes Prez we see 5 Republicans show up and are appointed either in his cabinet as chief adviser or in the Fed. the balance of GOP appointed were Daley, Sperling, Immelt, Geightner and the Bush holdover Bernanke

[KenArnold]

06:51 PM on 10/05/2011

I agree beyond politics we need to reform corporate governance so that it represents all stakeholders including the shareholders, even when ownership is through retirement plans and mutual funds.
We also need to bring truth, sanity and ethics back into our business and economics education and practice. The economic and business schools have been so corrupted over the past 3 decades that their teachings are self-conflicting and socio-pathic. They are still teaching greed is good and social and civic responsibility are only for PR purposes and ethics are only about not getting caught or buying PR and politicians to repair any damage if you do.

[Casey Covington]

02:55 PM on 10/04/2011

I signed the petition, but I would be a little worried if all donations were made illegal. If that were the case you would still only have the super-rich run for office as they would be the only ones with the means to afford the campaign. An amendment like this would forever block the average person from gaining the heights of the political sphere. Perhaps limiting the amount that any one person could donate would help. (Corporations are not people)

[Snerdgronk]

02:12 PM on 10/04/2011

For the conservative (R)ight, enable(R)z, the content of the $$$ creation system is irrelevant, as long as it is creating $$$. For the (R)adical (R)ight, the purpose of the $$$ creation system, is the control of its content ....

Snerd