Skip to main content

View Diary: The SCOTUS, the Chamber of Commerce, and a Code of Conduct (61 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Conservatives, perhaps because they (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RockyLabor

    eschew power, even though that's their main objective in seeking elective or appointed office, define "political" as an interest in being elected.  So, since the SCOTUS isn't elected, a code of conduct which prohibits political activity is nearly superfluous.  What it means in practice where judges are on the ballot is that the candidates are not supposed to spend money campaigning or even ask people for their votes.

    Now that government BY the people has the potential of actually being achieved, the members of our corporate entities (private and public) are somewhat on edge because they don't trust the people.  The electorate didn't challenge their autonomy and authority as long as the composition of the electorate was severely limited.  Universal suffrage is problematic.  Which is why an effort to thin the electorate has been on-going for the last four decades.  Low voter participation was not a happenstance.  It took a lot of work and seemed to be effective until the millenials came to the polls in ever increasing numbers.  Now the effort to thwart popular government has to be redoubled.  

    Public and private corporations are naturally sympathetic towards each other because they are both artificial man-made creatures.  While public corporations are actually empowered to control and even terminated the private corporations (as was done to the unions in Wisconsin), private commercial corporations have been able to escape strict regulation because our legislative representatives find it convenient to have private corporations do their dirty work for them behind the shield of confidentiality and rights to privacy and property.  If the sympathy isn't automatic, legislators have learned to extort support with the threat of punitive legislation.  It's a very clever form of corruption because legislators not doing in exchange for support at the ballot box and to fund campaigns is hard to prove.
    The Boeing/Airbus controversy, for example, garnered votes in Alabama, Illinois and Texas for a start, as first one then the other company seemed to get the nod.  The longer a controversy last, the longer the representatives' tenure in office is likely to be. Legislative failure, it turns out, is the key to longevity in Congress.  Not getting anything done is not penalized.

    http://www.youtube.com/cyprespond

    by hannah on Mon Mar 14, 2011 at 04:32:48 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site