Friday, March 5, 2010

Corporate America: The Party in Power



After a year of passive politics on Health Care, President Obama realized that change we can believe in can only come by playing Washington politics. No matter how charismatic our President may be, he will be unable to change the culture of politics as long as prominent political figures care more about their own agenda than the public’s interest. While it was necessary for the legislative branch to orchestrate reform to avoid suffering the fate of the Clinton health plan, the Democratic Party needed leadership and the American people needed answers to this convoluted and confusing reform. As the Republicans expertly perpetuated the problem through efficiently executed talking points in an effort to kill the bill on behalf of their sugar daddies (lobbyists), Obama called for a responsible discourse across the aisle in order for the best possible bill. As the Right wing choked the “socialist” ideals out of the bill and raised mindless populist support against the “Evil Empire,” the Democrats allowed the reform to transform into a moderately conservative bill. While over the course of the last week Obama has taken the initiative to make the final push to finish reform, many wonder whether it’s too little too late. But seriously, what took so long? Sure, the abuse of the filibuster certainly complicated the issue, and the comprehensive nature of health care does make it a lengthy subject, but the only innovated ideas about health care that have resulted from the last six months of debate are the various ways be which Republicans have attempted to cripple the legislative process.

So, who ultimately really is in power? The democrats surely can’t be so incompetent that they have a 59 seat minority in the Senate, right? They certainly have been limited in their ability to pass liberal bills, even when they had a supermajority. But it’d also be foolish to say that the Republicans have been dictating the legislation that has passed, even though they have done an extraordinary job at obstructing the democratic process. The only thing that the fractured GOP can agree upon is that they must furiously attack all things liberal. This shameless polarization of the political parties by the right has created an entirely inefficient process, which was exactly their goal until they can regain a majority or the presidency.

So if neither the Dems nor the Republicans are running congress, what party is primarily influencing decisions in Washington? A simple rule of thumb when attempting to understand the influences of politicians is to track the source of their funding, and one quickly discovers that politicians pander more to special interest groups and lobbyists than their constituents. In order to finance their own careers, elected officials choose to ally with individuals (including corporations who now have the same rights as people) who are able to will their wallets with campaign contributions. This taints the decision making process if politicians are forced to reconsider decisions based on whether it appeases or alienates funding from corporations. This shifts the focus of politicians from serving their role as public servants to finding private partners for their own agenda.


Now, it’d be foolish to say that everyone in Washington uses teleological ethics, but health care has illuminated how much power corporations have over our government. Arguably every republican (exceptions like our good friend Ron Paul do exist) and these ‘blue dog’ democrats represent the Health industry and not the American people. Blue dogs are the democrats from small states who give corporations the best return on their investments since their campaign contributions go a lot further. Obviously $10 million dollars for campaigning in Wyoming means a lot more than $10 million in New York.

If you think that health care is the exception and not the norm, open your eyes to some of the other issues. The Consumer Financial Protection Agency, a proposed group to provide a check against unethical financial practices of banks, credit companies, and other organizations using fine print and bombastic verbatim and jargon to deceive consumers, has been crippled by the buying power of our banks. With assets that make up 63% of our GDP, just the threat of the power of the banks has scared the Dems into nerfing the CFPA into a powerless regulator ruled by the banks.

Still don’t believe me? Look at almost any liberal legislation and you can almost without exception find a corporation funding opposition? It’s the reason our nation doesn’t have stricter federal pollutions laws. It’s the reason why discrimination in the work place lasted so long. It’s the reason why more cannot be done to ensure children from lower socio-economic classes have the same opportunity to pursue the American dream as anyone else. The only time liberal legislation is passed without a corporate response is when opposing it will tarnish the company image so much that it’s not worth it.


And please don’t even get me started with the potentially devastating effects of the recent Supreme Court decision opening the floodgates of corporate spending into campaign advertisements. Since the Citizen’s United ruling removes limits to campaign funding for both American and foreign corporations, our government could potentially be bought by the highest bidder. Companies will run campaigns for judges who support their agenda through judicial legislation. American companies receiving most of their profits from offshore subsidiaries will be able to promote ideas against the interests of America. It goes on and on, but I can’t wait for the day when Corporations are given the right to vote, or when The State of the Union is sponsored by Exxon, or when the Air Force One resembles a NASCAR Stockcar, or when the only voice of the people left – the internet – is censored by the passing of HR 8743 present by News Corp. I hope my children won’t one day be saying, “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United Corporations of America…”

If I sound like Olbermann forgive me, it’s because I’m scared – on Glenn Beck levels – that my government is going to turn into a monopoly, a dictatorship ruled by Corporate America or even China. Fortunately, there are bills being proposed to limit the initial fallout from Citizens United, but much greater campaign reform is needed to keep companies and organizations from corrupting the way politicians serve the common good. Whether its publically funded campaigns or extremely high taxations on the contributions or some other idea, something needs to change to make sure we do not end up with a government by the corporations, for the corporations.

1 comment:

  1. Yes, corporate funding has an impact obviously. But you make it sound like it is corporations that are solely responsible for our government not taking more action in programs for anti-pollution and others like you described. Naturally this is a corporate interest, but no pun intended, there is also a public interest. A huge portion of the population does not want increased government activity in these programs because they want to preserve resources for what they consider more important funding, and do not want increased taxes to compensate.

    ReplyDelete