Republicans are so fond of claiming nothing was the fault of Reagan or “W” Bush, perhaps that should be their campaign slogan: “Nothing is, or ever will be, a Republican President’s fault.” Whereas, those same Republicans often blame Obama for everything, including stuff that occurred before he took office.
From the start, Congressional Republicans have refused to work with President Obama on anything, then have the gall to accuse Obama of being a tyrant for not working with Congress? Republicans’ stated primary goal has been to oust Obama. Republicans refuse to pass any legislation that Democrats do not oppose for fear that cooperating with their political adversaries, getting anything done, might be construed as a victory for Obama?
Democracy is not just about elections. Democracy is about people with diverse backgrounds, priorities, and beliefs working together for the common good.
Democracy is about compromise. When people absolutely refuse to compromise, that’s tyranny.
Moreover, thanks largely to gerrymandering, Republicans control the U.S. House, even though Democratic candidates got more votes. Of course, Republicans complain bitterly about gerrymandering done by Democrats, but do so as if that excuses gerrymandering by Republicans. Even if true, since when does the excuse, “Democrats do it too,” excuse anything?
The above is a copy of my most recent “Letter to the Editor” published (9/1/14) by the Rockford (IL) Register Star (www.rrstar.com). (Over the years, I've had about a hundred published.)
Below the fold are copies of three other letters of mine published by the Register Star on the subject of campaign finance:
"Campaign Money Talks" 2/6/08
“Money is the volume control on speech that is not free.” 1/31/10
“Inequality is also, in effect, a form of prejudice.” 7/6/14
“Campaign Money Talks” 2/6/08
According to some, political advertising is a Constitutionally protected form of free speech... although it is hard to see how something which must be paid for can be considered free.
The First Amendment protects the freedom to say what one wants in an ad (barring libel, etc.). However, it is the principle of equal rights that gives every candidate the right to purchase advertising, and which might allow limits to be placed on campaign spending.
Fund-raising clearly taints the political process. The problem is: not all electioneering is done by the candidates.
Electioneering by third parties should not be prohibited, but there is no right to anonymity. One cannot evaluate the merits of a claim unless one knows both who is speaking and who is paying the bill.
Candidates who allow themselves to benefit from scurrilous campaign tactics must be viewed as guilty of those tactics. They cannot pretend to be innocent bystanders.
Campaign finance limits would not be truly fair unless candidates were allowed to match what is spent by their opponents’ supporters (or their detractors); or unless every paid political ad not subject to campaign finance restrictions were matched by a free ad in response.
“Money is the volume control on speech that is not free.” 1/31/10
The Supreme Court decision “legitimizing” the rule of money in politics was fallacious, wrong and disgusting.
Money is not free speech. Money is the volume control on speech that is not free. Those with money can now even more easily, in effect, shout down those without.
When corporations spend money on political campaigns, not only are they, in effect, trying to bribe public officials, but they are using shareholders’ money to do so.
Corporations should not be granted the rights of individuals. Corporations have neither the same responsibilities nor the same concerns as individuals. Rights and responsibilities are inseparable. One can’t have one without the other.
It is the citizens of a country (whether they vote or not) who are ultimately responsible for the conduct of their government.
Unlike commercials, political advertisements also try to convince people to surrender control of their government to the wealthy and those with an ax to grind.
We, the voters, must remember that the source of the message is at least as important as the advertisement’s message itself. A politician’s ability to collect support from businesses, [unions] and other special interests is often not a good thing.
“Inequality is also, in effect, a form of prejudice.” 7/6/14
Some inequality is inevitable. Everyone has different talents and priorities. However, inequality is also, in effect, a form of prejudice that gives some people advantages they do not merit and denies many others the opportunity to show what they can accomplish. And prejudicial discrimination is not just wrong, it’s bad economics.
Even Bill Gross, the reputedly autocratic head of Pimco, recently warned that increasing income inequality is a major threat to the future of capitalism, our economy, and our democracy.
Even if rich people only did good things with their wealth, that would not correct the underlying inequity. But, power corrupts, and buying political power is a particularly pernicious, and pervasive, form of corruption.
Apparently, the Koch brothers’ vision for America is one where rich oligarchs, a hereditary plutocracy, would control everything. Government is all about checks and balances, but they want none. They, and others who have subverted campaign finance laws, have co-opted Republican party economic policy to further their own agenda, and their own self-interest.
Some Republicans may claim money is free speech. It’s not. Whatever money is, it’s certainly not free. Money is a weapon. And one that’s often at war with the truth.