Follow the Money

In the post Citizen's United political reality, the presence of unprecedented amounts of money in our political system has sought to remake our government. With this decision, Harry "Lighthorse" Lee's pronouncement of the Constitution of 1787 as being a gateway to oligarchy comes to fruition.

Take for example the struggle the President and others have had in establishing the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, many called for a reexamination of the financial regulations and the agencies charged with enforcement. The resulting legislation, while lacking the teeth of Glass-Stegall it at least sought to establish an agency charged with ensuring that consumers would not fall victim to predatory lending and other unsavory practices. Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, believes this is a bad idea. And the head of the House Banking Committee believes that government and its regulators exist to serve the banks. These positions are not unexpected if you see who their major campaign contributors are. The financial services industry has given over $5 billion dollars in campaign contributions directly to federal legislatures, an investment they certainly expect to pay dividends in the form of favorable legislation and regulations. On today's Cenk Uygur show a journalist from Wall Street Journal said financial regulation would harm job creation, and parroted the views of the financial sector.

Protecting consumers in the marketplace is one function that our federal government is uniquely positioned to perform effectively. Consumers should know, in plain language, what the contract for credit they are entering into entails of them. An agency charged with ensuring this practice should find at its head someone who is not on the financial services industry payroll. Elizabeth Warren is someone who understands this, and that is why the Republicans in the Senate have been against her appointment as well as anyone to head an agency that would protect the consumer from the financial services industry.

In Oliver Stone's film JFK, X told Jim Garrison to follow the money if you wanted to know who killed Kennedy. If you want to know why your elected representatives are taking the positions they are, you should follow their money. Look at who are their largest campaign contributors, and how their voting record supports those donors. When in doubt, follow the money.

On the eve of the elections some things to think about

Tomorrow the nation goes to the polls and we as Americans are faced with important decisions when we go to cast our ballot. We must think with our heads and not just out of abject frustration.

Yes the economy is not where we would have hoped it to be. The dire situation that Barack Obama faced when he took office was not some overnight fluke, it was the product of 2 decades worth of failed policies. Trickle down Does Not Work, or so says Regan's former budget director.

In 8 years George W. Bush took a budget surplus and created systemic deficits by giving tax breaks to the wealthiest in the country. If the Republican mantra of cut taxes, cut taxes were the cure a sluggish economy then the Bush years should have shown explosive job growth not a steady and sure increase in the unemployment. We lost more jobs in those 8 years than we can hope to get back in 18 months.

We have candidates who are running campaigns who want to undo much of the 20th century. There are some like Sharon Angle who wants to eliminate the Departments of Education and Energy while privatizing the Veteran's Administration, Social Security. There are others who would eliminate or cut back on unemployment in the midst of the recession while protecting the tax breaks for the richest of the rich.

In the last 18 months we have seen the beginnings of progress, and tons of great legislation stalled in the Senate. First we have the Stimulus bill. This bill provided tax cuts for about 95% of Americans and some money for public works projects. It has worked but not as well as expected. Reason, tax cuts are the least effective means of stimulating the economy. Putting money into the hands of those who would spend it is the most effective. This bill was too small and not enough money for public works. We have tens of billions of dollars of infrastructure projects that need to be addressed. We have flood control systems that need some attention, you can ask people in New Orleans about what happens when you don't maintain your levees. We have thousands of miles of roads to build, expand and repair. We have bridges that need to be fixed, or they will crumble like the I35 bridge in Minneapolis. We have the need to extend broadband and fiber optics to rural areas. We can begin to convert our energy grid to one that is dependant on fossil fuels to one that is more reliant on solar, wind and geo-thermal. These are projects that would put people back to work which means people will spend money which creates velocity and the money spent on these projects produce a great sum in stimulus to the economy.

The right has attacked the health care bill. They found no problem with insurance companies denying care to sick people to protect their profit margin. They found no problem with CEO's raking in billions of dollars in bonuses, while some of those covered by their insurance company died because they were denied access to care. They Republicans would end the ability of young adults remaining on their parent's policy until they could get their feet wet in their careers after college. The Right believes that it is criminal that we should mandate that insurance companies limit overhead to 20% of premiums.

The difference between the two parties philosophies is stark. The Democrats believe that our best days are ahead of us, the Republicans want to turn back the clock. The Democrats believe our society can help those who are less fortunate, the Republicans believe they should help themselves. This is the difference between seeing unity and relishing in division.

Politics is local...and the decisions we make or fail to make can have long reaching repercussions. Tomorrow, before going to vote, examine each candidate and ask yourself, "What have you done for me lately?" The Democrats have produced the first net gains in jobs since the early 2000s. The Democrats passed the most extensive financial regulatory reform since the 1930s. The Democrats stood strong to make an investment and improve access to higher education. The Democrats want to keep government from intruding in the most personal parts of our private lives (the very definition of small government). The Democrats fought to pass a bill that would encourage companies to stem the tide of outsourcing and keep the jobs in the USA. This isn't the be all, end all but it is a start. If you believe that we have a bright future than you know who you have to vote D and move forward.

If you want to reward the most obstructionist group of policy makers. A party that doesn't see the value of American industry. A party that is fueled by monied interests that that do not favor a strong middle or working class. A party that has offered not one new or original idea to fix what ails us. Then put the car in R and see if we don't hit the ditch again.