There is a big debate within the Democratic Party about the role business should play. One argument states the Democrats are too beholden to business interests at the expense of traditional Democratic constituents. Others argue Democrats need to accept business interests in order to attain the political majority. Below I argue for acceptance of business as a legitimate Democratic constituency. However, we should accept business with certain stipulations that hold to traditional Democratic values.
I am capitalist. I like profits and I like making money. Communism does not work. While Marx made some astute observations about economics, his theories do not translate into reality. I believe in the market and its usefulness as a method of allocating resources. I should also add I have been on the negative side of corporate downsizing, so I am personally aware of the large and brutal pitfalls of capitalism. I have walked into an office at 7AM, only to be told at 8AM that the central office was closing the branch office. It is a terrible experience that I would not wish on anyone. However, my own personal experience does not invalidate a system.
I believe the phrase "what is good for General Motors is good for the US" has merit. When business is doing well, it is more likely to hire employees who will then benefit in the businesses success by making wages and benefits. And before I get a "they're screwing the middle class by not increasing wages" argument, I will point out that I have written extensively on the current middle class squeeze as a result of stagnant wages, escalating medical and tuition expenses, and draconian bankruptcy provisions.
I would hazard that most people in general agree in principle with the above statements. People like making money and enjoy the benefits offered by market-based competition. People like cheap goods. People like the idea of businesses doing well because it usually means they personally have a better chance of doing well.
Do I believe that business currently has too much power in the US? The answer is a resounding yes. Regrettably, we live in an age where people in positions of power and influence - regardless of their political or religious affiliation - are more prone to act in selfish ways that destroy others well being. Enron, Worldcom, Health South, and Tyco are all examples of individuals who placed personal gain above the welfare of the their employees. They are horrible instances of graft and greed. All who perpetrated these acts should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Did I just say "the law"? I did use that phrase. What a fortuitous coincidence, because it is the law which provides the answer to Democrat's dilemma, and the law as used by one Eliot Spitzer as a prime example of how Democrats should act toward business.
There are rules, codified as laws, which govern business' behavior. And it is these laws the Democrats should enforce to the fullest extent allowed by the law. There are numerous examples in the Bush administration where corporate interests have co-opted an agency to make it less effective. This is bad and must be stopped when the Democrats retake the White House.
What has Spitzer really done? He has created an environment where rule breaking is punished. Play by the rules, and he will leave you alone. Break the rules, and there will be consequences. Simple, clean and neat.
Which leads to this conclusion: Democrats should embrace and promote ethical business practices and work to create a level playing field where competition is honest, has integrity and is fair to all. This is what we should tell businesses who donate money to the Democratic Party; this is what we expect of you, as corporate citizens of the US who have benefited from the largest economy in the world. We expect you to live by the law. If you don't, we will prosecute you. And - we will be watching.