Skip to main content

The first time I was involved in politics was in my hometown in South Jersey.  The year was 1971.  I had moved home from college and was just finishing my first year of law school.  A friend from high school had been elected a Democratic committeeman in my (very Republican) home town.  He asked me to get involved and be a district leader for the district in which my family resided.

That Fall, we were courted by a young, first-term Democratic Assemblyman who had been redistricted such that my home town was now part of his Assembly district.  Two years earlier, he had defeated a long-time Democratic Assemblyman who was part of an old (and corrupt) machine in Camden.

Any event we scheduled for him, he attended.  He spoke as long as it took.  We knocked on doors.  We made phone calls.  Because I was a local and had graduated from the local high school, folks were willing to listen to me.  We all worked very hard.

Our goal, which we hoped was realistic, was to increase Democratic turnout for the election as well as switch a substantial number of Republicans to voting for a Democratic Assemblyman.  He ended up losing our town by a slim margin, which he more than made up for in the City.  The Republicans had, of course, been hoping that towns like ours would cancel the Democratic advantage in the City.  He was re-elected.

Once back in office, he came to see us regularly.  He was in regular touch with our Borough Commissioners, who were all Republican.  If our Borough needed something from the Legislature, he would try to push through the appropriate Bill.

This Assemblyman eventually ran for the Congressional seat that included our Borough.  He won on the second try and served for many years in the House.

I moved away shortly after he was elected to Congress but was back regularly.  I never heard of any scandal surrounding this official.  There was never any hint of his taking bribes, which had been the common practice of the machine politician he defeated in that 1969 primary.

In our local Democratic organization, we wanted to do away with the taint that surrounded many Democratic organizations because of years of bribe-taking in so many urban machines.  Such corruption would never get the votes of our Republican neighbors, even if they were inclined to consider certain Democratic positions.  They wanted "clean" politics.  (Remember that this is before Watergate.)

It seems that the entire process is now broken.  I now live in Los Angeles County, California.  Many years ago, the electorate enacted something called the Fair Political Practices Act.  Sad to say, the FPPA has now been amended so that political contributions can be used for anything that arguably has anything to do with one's legislative office.

The maximum individual contribution for a legislative campaign is $3,900 per election.  Every two years, there are two elections, a primary and a general.  That's $7,800 every two years, which becomes $15,600 if a married couple jointly donate.

How is this money spent?  The Los Angeles Times recently provided an example when they looked at some of the expenditures of various Assembly members.  One former Speaker of the Assembly took his family to France for a vacation.  While there, he purchased $10,000 worth of premium French wine, which he said he would be using to serve at fund raising events.  He spent over $5,000 at the Louis Vuitton store, which he said was for staff gifts.  No one ever actually follows up on these claims.  I frankly find the claims specious.  The trip, the wine, and the shopping spree were all paid out of campaign funds.  The campaign funds paid not just for his travel, lodgings, and food, but those of his wife and children as well.

Many Democrats continue to like such politicians because they vote "their way" on certain progressive legislation.  Progressives originally tried to get rid of the bribe-takers because of the taint and because we could not compete with big money.  Many seem to have forgotten that.

In California now, the mantra of the citizenry is that everyone in politics is corrupt, so it doesn't matter if your representative is corrupt, so long as he or she is voting the "right" way.  This attitude, which I have heard so many times, is nausea-inducing.

My representative in the Assembly routinely takes his wife with him to campaign appearances.  His wife is a Superior Court judge.  It is a violation of the Canons of Judicial Ethics for a Judge to endorse or campaign for or with any candidate for non-judicial office.  There are no exceptions for spouses.  The Assemblyman doesn't care.  The Supreme Court doesn't care.  Progressives seem to have given up on the foundation of progressivism.

In the current health care reform debate, we know that Senator Max Baucus and Senator Kent Conrad are fighting the public option after they have received millions of dollars in campaign funds from health insurers.  No one has called this bribery.  This is distressing, since doing so would reflect the deserved shame we as Democrats should feel about having such scum in the party.  They simply do not pass the smell test.

Folks who profess to be progressive should focus on a bit of cleanliness, lest the election be won and the soul be lost.

Originally posted to ScarySteve on Mon Aug 24, 2009 at 04:27 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The most broken (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux, shann

    part of our political system is the Senate. I have never understood how the framers didn't see the senate as the biggest potential problem. It is set up like an exclusive gated community - very hard for anything to get in but once it gets in nigh on impossible for it to get out - this includes both people and abstractions such as corruption.

    I think that it is way past time for reforms including at the very least public funding of elections and a completely independent ethics committee comprised of legal experts with absolutely no connections to Senators or corporations.

  •  Just MHO but,,,: (0+ / 0-)

    Folks who profess to be progressive should focus on a bit of cleanliness, lest the election be won and the soul be lost.

           Let's win the elections, pass the necessary legislation and then worry about "moral purity". I remember back in 2000 all the talk, especially from the nader camp that there was no difference between bush and Gore. We all recall how well that turned out don't we?

    That's America, buddy! So wake up -- to your only logical choice: Me. George Tirebiter

    by irate on Mon Aug 24, 2009 at 05:02:51 AM PDT

  •  They already lost their souls... (0+ / 0-)

    Anyone that takes bribes and votes for policies that favor corporations over the people they represent are already dead inside and have no conscience.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site