Between a candidate who takes money for a charity and one who owes immense business debts you have to go for the charity runner, but why should we have to choose?
Why can’t we have Presidential candidates who aren’t beholden to foreign powers or corporations. When can we have candidates who are beholden to the people of this country and no one else?
Foundation Ties Bedevil Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Campaign http://nyti.ms/2bvSXgr
Money is the root of all political evil and it keeps our government from being of the people and for the people.
Anonymous corporate donations are not helping this country.
Defenders of the status quo argue the companies are simply exercising their right to free speech; critics contend that such speech, when anonymous, does immense harm to the democratic process.
Corporate donations aren’t necessarily in shareholders best interest either.
For example, in 2010 Target, a company that supports gay rights and has openly gay employees, donated $150,000 to a Minnesota organization called MN Forward, which advocates pro-business tax and economic development policies. But MN Forward ran TV ads supporting a candidate for governor who sought a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. When news about the donation came to light, the company faced an employee backlash and a boycott from consumers that ultimately resulted in a personal apology from Gregg Steinhafel, Target’s chief executive, and the formation of a committee to review the company’s political spending.
Why Dark Money Is Bad Business http://nyti.ms/1qaCYaq
After the intro about the loon, this article is a good summary of the disproportionate effect money has on politics.
This is why the rules of the game in today’s system already massively compound the advantages that the wealthy have in life. It’s why our tax system bends to favor capital and punish work. Dividends and “carried interest” are taxed at lower rates than earned income not because these preferences are shown to benefit society at large but because the hedge fund managers and venture capitalists who do benefit from them have excellent representation in Congress.
Its also worth noting that the loon as a representative of the fiscally conservative has,
no appreciation for the multigenerational legacy of public investment that made [their] success possible
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/18/opinion/liu-perkins-rich-have-more-votes/index.html?hpt=hp_t4
This article shows the depth of the dysfunction in our electoral process. It points to the outsized power business interest lobbyists have in Congress.
After the 2010 elections, the Chamber and other business interests funneled millions of dollars into Republican redistricting efforts around the country, helping draw overwhelmingly safe Republican districts whose occupants — many among the most conservative House members — are now far less vulnerable to challenges from more moderate Republicans.
The staff here finds a perverse sort of enjoyment in the idea that an entrenched, but fundamentally broken system can be upset by a small band of elected misfits. There is certainly something good about politicians not bowing to their corporate overlords. It’s the context of holding the entire governmental process and the country itself hostage in the process that rankles the staff. We would prefer to see fundamental change that makes the government more fairly representative of its constituents, not its special interests.
Moreover, business leaders and trade groups said, the tools that have served them in the past — campaign contributions, large memberships across the country, a multibillion-dollar lobbying apparatus — do not seem to be working.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/10/us/business-groups-see-loss-of-sway-over-house-gop.html?src=recg
The American people want and deserve a representative democracy that represents the people, not super-rich donors. But unless we come together and demand change, Congress will continue to be owned (or at least rented) by big money.
As the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission wrote in its 2011 report, “It did not surprise the Commission that an industry of such wealth and power would exert pressure on policy makers and regulators. From 1999 to 2008, the financial sector expended $2.7 billion in reported federal lobbying expenses; individuals and political action committees in the sector made more than $1 billion in campaign contributions.”
http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/03/opinion/cohen-ahrens-tarp/index.html?iid=article_sidebar
NobodyisFlyingthePlane 