The Democratic Party has a lot of diversity and a lot of talented and capable politicians and leaders so it is a mystery to me why Democratic voters tolerate politicians that are obviously outside the mainstream of the rank-and-file of the party. In hopes of appealing to voters who were “moderate” or Republican, for example, Democrats nominated Joe Lieberman to be Al Gore’s VP in 2000, and after that allowed Joe to play the spoiler in the Senate on many progressive policies and initiatives. Joe Lieberman was so far to the right in the Democratic party that John McCain first wanted Joe Lieberman to be his VP in 2008, before settling on Sarah Palin. At least as late as 2015 Joe Lieberman was actually still saying this about the Iraq War:
“I think the world is a lot better off, not withstanding all the problems in Iraq,” former Sen. Joe Lieberman told MSNBC on Monday in an interview. “I think the world is better off and the region is better off and the people of Iraq are better off.”
Iraq can’t even defend itself without outside help; the country is split by factions and violence with corruption running rampant and citizens lacking basic services.
Here are the opening paragraphs of a UNICEF report on Iraq from 2018:
NEW YORK (January 19, 2018) – “Iraq today hosts one of UNICEF’s largest operations in the world, responding with humanitarian and development assistance to the needs of the most vulnerable girls and boys across the country.
“More than 4 million children have been impacted by extreme violence in several areas including in Ninewa and al-Anbar. Last year alone, 270 children were killed. Many were robbed of their childhood, forced to fight on the frontlines. Some will bear the physical and psychological scars for life due to exposure to unprecedented brutality. Over 1 million children were forced to leave their homes.
“While the fighting has come to an end in several areas, spikes of violence continue in others. Just this week, three bombings went off in Baghdad. Violence is not only killing and maiming children; it is destroying schools, hospitals, homes and roads. It is tearing apart the diverse social fabric and the culture of tolerance that hold communities together.
I just don’t agree with Joe Lieberman that Iraq is better off or that the region is better off or that the US is better off for having fought the Iraq War. All throughout Joe Lieberman’s time in the Senate his defenders in the party always said how we really needed people like Joe in order to “reach across the aisle”, or find “common ground” with Republicans. But it always turned out that Joe would help Republicans enact policies that harmed the very people the Democratic Party is supposed to be about representing.
President Obama wanted to roll back some of the Bush tax cuts while Joe Lieberman (who had become an Independent but still allowed to caucus with Democrats) opposed him:
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) broke with the Obama administration message on the Bush tax cuts Monday, calling for an extension of all breaks — including those for the top 3 percent of American money earners.
Lieberman, who caucuses with Senate Democrats, expressed his "strong" support for the temporary extension of the across-the-board tax cuts in a speech to the Middlesex Chamber of Commerce in Connecticut. His support for the Republican position of not raising any taxes in the midst of a recession highlights the intense battle set for Congress as lawmakers return to Washington Monday.
Progressives wanted to roll back those tax cuts because we thought it would help pay for things on the progressive agenda at the time. In a similar way Joe Manchin receives far more attention, and has more voice in the party than his ideas actually represent. When I look at the Republican Party it is not like that at all because I know of no Republicans who are environmentalists or anti-war, or even pro-choice. But certain Democrats are always reaching over to the right as though they are going to find a hand there willing to work with them or a big election victory. But the only Democrat that I ever saw do this successfully in my lifetime was Bill Clinton and he never won more than 49% of the popular vote and Republicans impeached him anyway.
This is why I find the candidacy and popularity of Pete Buttigieg so interesting because it is as though Democrats still think that candidates that come from this “centrist” model are appealing to voters or that they can they can somehow thread the needle and get Republicans to buy into their proposals. Republicans are not going to accept or work with any of our candidates unless our candidates abandon the principles of the party and the people who voted for them. I get the appeal of boy geniuses to a lot of people in our country but it turns out that boy geniuses often get a lot of things wrong and hurt people.
A lot of progressives and Democrats started out as Republicans or had past associations with various groups and entities that progressives fight all of the time. I got to know a guy in the Air Force who was very conservative but he changed his outlook and became a very enthusiastic liberal. But I have to say that it is rare in my experience that people make a dramatic change unless some major event causes them to rethink their past worldview. So, Pete Buttigieg’s time working for McKinsey & Company should give voters in the Democratic primaries pause because he is still only in his 30s and we can’t really know what he worked on at McKinsey or where he really stands politically. His military background is impressive, but so was John Kerry’s and John Kerry got swiftboated in 2004; other than that he is the mayor of South Bend and hasn’t been elected to any statewide office.
The problem with McKinsey & Company is that they are a company that is all to familiar to those of us who have gained experience over the last decades in progressive politics. It’s a management and consulting firm that harms workers, the economy, and has a negative influence on politics in the United States and around the world. There are many articles about McKinsey and they always seem to be like the guy in the movies that always just happens to be there when some tragedy unfolds but swears that they had nothing to do with it:
Here are some of Mckinsey & Companies greatest hits:
Enron
Enron was the creation of Jeff Skilling, a McKinsey consultant of 21 years, who was jailed after the company collapsed. McKinsey reportedly "fully endorsed the dubious accounting methods that caused the company to implode in 2001."[92] Enron reportedly used McKinsey on 20 different projects,[95] and McKinsey consultants had "used Enron as their sandbox."[95]
McKinsey denied giving Enron advice on financing issues or having suspicions that Enron was using improper accounting methods.[95]
Valeant
The most recent case of indirect involvement concerns Valeant, a Canadian pharmaceutical company investigated by the SEC in 2015. Valeant has been accused of improper accounting, and that it used predatory price hikes to boost growth.[96] The Financial Times states that 'Valeant's downfall is not exactly McKinsey's fault but its fingerprints are everywhere.'[97] Three out of six senior executives were recent ex-McKinsey employees, as well as the chair of the 'talent and compensation' committee.[97]
Role in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
McKinsey stopped working for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) after it was disclosed that the firm had done more than $20 million in consulting work for the agency. McKinsey managing partner Kevin Sneader said the contract, not widely known within the company until The New York Times reported it, had "rightly raised" concerns.[98] In 2019, The New York Times and ProPublica reported on newly uncovered documents which showed that McKinsey, as part of its work with ICE, proposed cuts in spending on food and medical care for migrants.[99] McKinsey also advocated for an acceleration of the deportation process, causing concerns among ICE staff that the due process rights of the migrants would be violated.[99] Previously, McKinsey managing partner, Kevin Sneader, had claimed that McKinsey had done no work for ICE in terms of developing and implementing immigration policy; the uncovered documents showed that to be false.[99]
Role in Saudi clampdown on dissidents
In October 2018, in the wake of the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident and journalist, The New York Times reported that McKinsey had identified the most prominent Saudi dissidents on Twitter and that the Saudi government subsequently repressed the dissidents and their families. One of the dissidents was arrested. Another dissident's family members were arrested, and the cell phone of the dissident was hacked. McKinsey issued a statement, saying "We are horrified by the possibility, however remote, that [the report] could have been misused. We have seen no evidence to suggest that it was misused, but we are urgently investigating how and with whom the document was shared."[100] In December 2018, The New York Times reported that "the kingdom is a such a vital client for the firm — the source of nearly 600 projects from 2011 to 2016 alone — that McKinsey chose to participate in a major Saudi investment conference in October 2018 even after the killing and dismemberment of a Washington Post columnist by Saudi agents."[101]
On February 12, 2019, the European Parliament Greens/EFA group presented a motion for a resolution on the situation on women’s rights defenders in Saudi Arabia denouncing the involvement of foreign public relations companies in representing Saudi Arabia and handling its public image, particularly McKinsey & Company.[102]
Support of authoritarian regimes
McKinsey's business and policy support for authoritarian regimes came under scrutiny in December 2018, in the wake of a lavish company retreat in China held adjacent to Chinese government internment camps where thousands of Uyghurs were being detained without cause.[101][103] In the preceding few years, McKinsey's clients included Saudi Arabia's absolute monarchy,[100][104][105] Turkey's autocratic leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan, ousted former President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych, and several Chinese and Russian companies under sanctions.[101]
Role in opioid epidemic
McKinsey advised opioid makers on how to “turbocharge” sales of OxyContin, propose strategies "to counter the emotional messages from mothers with teenagers that overdosed" on OxyContin, and help opioid makers to circumvent regulation.[126]
Galleon insider trading scandal
Former McKinsey senior executives, Rajat Gupta and Anil Kumar, were among those convicted in a government investigation into insider trading for sharing inside information with Galleon Group hedge fund owner Raj Rajaratnam.[108][109] Though McKinsey was not accused of any wrongdoing, the convictions were embarrassing for the firm, since it prides itself for integrity and client confidentiality.[110][111][112] Following the initial allegations McKinsey no longer maintains a relationship with either senior partner,[113][114] though the manner in which it severed ties attracted controversy.[115]
Ongoing South African corruption scandal
The Gupta family (no relation to Rajat Gupta) had strategically placed corrupted individuals in various South African government, utilities and infrastructure sectors. It is alleged that McKinsey was complicit in this corruption by using the Guptas to obtain consulting contracts from certain state-owned enterprises, including Eskom and Transnet.[127] Working with Trillian Capital Partners (a consultancy which was owned by a Gupta associate),[128] they provided services to the value of R1 billion ($75 million) annually. Trillian was paid a commission for facilitating the business for McKinsey.[129]
2018 Racketeering Lawsuit
As of May 2018, the restructuring practice of McKinsey is being sued by a competitor claiming the company knowingly mislead courts in order to land clients.[144] The company disclosed an average of only five potential conflicts per case, whereas other professional-services firms divulged, on average, 171 connections. In most cases it disclosed no conflicts at all.[145]
McKinsey's Work in Mongolia
In 2010, Mongolia’s state-owned rail company hired a team assembled by Chuluunkhuu Ganbat, with McKinsey playing the leading role, to conduct an analysis of whether a new railroad plan was feasible. McKinsey’s contract spelled out that McKinsey would be eligible for more lucrative multiyear contracts if the project progressed. The railroad expansion quickly went bad. Construction stalled amid financial problems and political uncertainty. By 2015, Mongolian police were investigating claims of widespread embezzlement and fraud. McKinsey was drawn into the investigation, with authorities ordering the firm to hand over records related to the project.[146]
Involvement in New Yangon City Development
In 2018, McKinsey developed the Socio-Economic Masterplan for New Yangon City Development,[147] a controversial project in Myanmar. The project has been particularly criticized for the lack of transparent tendering.[148] The CEO of New Yangon City Development is Serge Pun, whom US officials recommended for sanctions in 2008.[149]
Environmental consulting
Marginal abatement cost curves attempt to compare the financial costs of different options for reducing pollution in a region and are used in emissions trading, policy discussions and incentive programs.[150] McKinsey & Company released its first marginal abatement cost (MAC) curve for greenhouse gas emissions in February 2007, which was updated to version two in January 2009.[151][152] McKinsey & Company's MAC curve has become the most widely used[153] and is the basis for McKinsey's consulting on climate change and sustainability.[154]
McKinsey's curve predicts negative cost abatement strategies, which has been controversial among economists.[155] The International Association for Energy Economics said in The Energy Journal that McKinsey's cost-curve was popular among policymakers, because it suggests they can take "bold action towards improving energy efficiency without imposing costs on society."
2008 financial crisis
McKinsey is said to have played a significant role in the 2008 financial crisis by promoting the securitization of mortgage assets and encouraged the banks to fund their balance sheets with debt, driving up risk, which 'poisoned the global financial system and precipitated the 2008 credit meltdown'.[92] Furthermore, McKinsey advised Allstate Insurance to purposefully give low offers to claimants. The Huffington Post revealed that the strategy was to make claims "so expensive and so time-consuming that lawyers would start refusing to help clients."[164] Next to this, 2016 McKinsey partner Navdeep Arora was convicted for illegally depleting State Farm of over $500,000 over a period of 8 years, in collaboration with a State Farm employee.[165]
Pete Buttigieg worked for McKinsey during the Iraq War and took trips to Iraq and Afghanistan for McKinsey. He says that he can't talk about his work for Mckinsey in those countries:
But when it comes to his work abroad with McKinsey, he only drops hints about working on "war zone economic development to help grow private sector employment" in Iraq and Afghanistan. He also refers to a "safe house" in Baghdad. The book doesn't say exactly when or how long Buttigieg was in either country.
And beyond that, details are scarce -- by design.
‘The strictest confidentiality'
"So McKinsey, the way it works, is truly on a confidential basis. They won't mention publicly what project they'll do," Taufiq Rahim, a former McKinsey consultant in the Middle East and current New America senior fellow, told ABC News. "Sometimes their work comes to the fore in this region, but they're generally able to be even more secretive here."
The problem with Mayor Pete saying that he was working to grow private sector employment in Iraq and Afghanistan is that that project was ideological and doomed to fail from the start. If private sector employment was successful in Iraq we wouldn’t have the dismal reports out of Iraq about the poor security environment and lack of basic food and water for much of the population. Even though the US never really secured Iraq, the ideologues and firms like McKinsey & Company are still talking about privatization projects and the need to increase private employment in a country that still lacks clean water and basic infrastructure. It frankly reminds me of the Bush years when they sent a lot of boy geniuses to Iraq to do things like rebuild the Iraqi Stock Market without any experience in finance.
The person the Bush Administration picked to reopen the Iraqi Stock Exchange was a 24 year-old named Jay Hallen who was bored with his job in real estate and was looking for something more exciting and then found himself in charge of Iraq’s stock exchange:
“I’m not here for the Iraqis,” one worker noted over lunch. “I’m here for George Bush.”
The day he arrived, he met with Thomas Foley, the CPA official in charge of privatizing state-owned enterprises. (Foley, a major Republican Party donor, went to Harvard Business School with Bush.) Foley wanted Hallen to take charge of reopening the stock exchange.
“Are you sure?” Hallen said to Foley. “I don’t have a finance background.”
It’s fine, Foley replied. Hallen would rely on other people to get things done.
Thomas Foley of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) was charged with privatizing state-owned enterprises while people like Pete Buttigieg were trying to increase private employment. A lot of experts at the time pointed out that the rebuilding of those countries could be done easier and cheaper by public works and direct employment by government. The Iraqi Army was disbanded and a lot of the security work was farmed out to private companies. The rebuilding of Iraq and Afghanistan was not done to serve the people of those countries but to rebuild those countries in accordance with Milton Friedman’s free market ideology while profiting loyal corporations and boy genius ideologues.
I’ve known a lot of smart people on the left who are young and could work at a lot of places but they often choose to take a position with little pay and even less prestige because they want to do something that they think will make a difference. When I was in college and in the military I never met one person from various left or progressive circles who expressed a desire to work for a firm like McKinsey & Company. At some point the Democratic Party and the US have to come to terms with the reality of what happened during those wars and find a way to talk about all the lives that have been lost to impose Milton Friedman’s free market vision on poor countries that never asked for it.
I suppose I would take Pete Buttigieg’s campaign more seriously if he were a couple more decades removed from his days as a boy genius for a military occupation that was full of boy geniuses. If he ever expressed any regret or ever really criticized his role or McKinsey’s role in created misery for free market ideology then I haven’t heard it.
Democrats also have two billionaires running in the primary as an entitlement, while a qualified Senator from California was forced to drop out mostly due to lack of funds.