Hightower Lowdown

"For too long," wailed the senator in a heart-tugging cry for justice, "some in this country have been deprived of full participation in the political process."

Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader of the U.S. Senate, has never been mistaken for a bleeding-heart liberal, so you can rest assured that his anguish over inequality did not concern the disenfranchisement of minorities or poor people--or any kind of people, for that matter. No, it is the tragic political deprivation faced by America's corporations that moved Mitch to such an outpouring of woe.

And you thought compassionate conservatism was dead.

McConnell was expressing his solidarity with the five Supreme Court justices who ruled on January 21 that our poor corporate citizens are victims of a crass "censorship" unjustly imposed on them by local, state, and national campaign-spending laws. "Let Corporations Speak," chanted the Supreme Five. "Free the Corporate Money," they demanded.

And lo, they made it so. In the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, these five judicial contortionists perverted the Constitution, a century of the Court's own precedents, common sense, logic, and the laws of nature to decree that inanimate, corporate entities must be granted the human right to "speak" in the political arena. Never mind that a corporation is nothing but a legal construct created by the state and has no mouth, tongue, or brain for speaking--the Court fabricated a political voice for these paper inventions by declaring that their money is their language.

Thus, not only can the living, breathing executives of corporations continue dumping millions of their own dollars into elections (money that totaled more than a billion dollars in the 2008 cycle, meaning that corporate interests already possess far and away the most dominant voice in shaping our public policies), but henceforth, the trillions of dollars held by the corporate entities themselves can also be poured into electioneering ads and other forms of "speech." [ read more ]

The political media establishment is enraptured by John McCain. Mainline media sparklies, as well as the blatherers on the Fox channel, routinely buff up his image as a straight-talking, maverick foe of Washington's special interests. "The press loves McCain. We're his base," gushes MSNBC's Chris Matthews. But if the senator really is the feared reformer of business-as-usual government, why does his presidential campaign look like the back alley of K Street?

Many a president has had certain supporters behind him whom he should have moved out in front in order to keep an eye on them. McCain, however, isn't even bothering to keep his self-interested backers in the shadows--he has literally put them in charge of his campaign. "Tell me with whom you walk," goes the old adage, "and I'll tell you who you are." Candidate McCain is walking cozily with a coterie of corporate lobbyists, executives, and fund-raisers who are shaping his policies... and expecting to walk right into the White House with him.

There was a hilarious dustup in May when two of the campaign's key operatives were publicly fingered as lobbyists for the totalitarian military thugs who rule Burma. Bad image. To patch over this embarrassing exposure, the campaign dumped the duo and loudly proclaimed a new internal ethics rule barring lobbyists from paid positions on the "Straight Talk Express." Bold! Decisive! Laudable!

Except that it was a crock. Here's the hilarious part: the announcement was made by the top campaign staffer, Rick Davis. Guess what he is. A lobbyist! His clients range from such telecom giants as Verizon to undies-maker Fruit of the Loom, and most have had business before McCain's Senate committees.

The trick is that the new rule bars "active" lobbyists from being "paid" to work "full time" on the staff. [ read more ]

Dallas Oilman H.L. Hunt was a billionaire in a time when such massive wealth was unusual, back in the 1950s and '60s. H.L. was also politically bonkers--so far out there on the right-right-right wing that he considered Dwight Eisenhower a commie. In 1960, Hunt published a novel called Alpaca, in which he set forth his utopian vision for the governance of America. In the happy plutocratic kingdom he envisioned, the richer you are, the more votes you get.

Alas, poor H.L. couldn't get any sane people to take him seriously back then. Yet over the years, his wealthatopian fantasy has steadily crept into our political reality, becoming incorporated in today's campaign-funding system. As we've seen in both congressional and presidential races, money doesn't merely talk, it shouts, and it's been drowning out the voice of the people on issue after issue. While wealthy donors make up only a fraction of one percent of the population, they have gained a bigger vote in national public policy than the electorate at large.

The system unabashedly teaches that money is the ballot that counts and big donors are the citizens who matter. This is why a majority of Americans have become disenchanted-- to disgusted with politics during the past few decades. It's also why there is growing support for publicly financed campaigns, which grassroots groups have pushed through in seven states, stretching from Maine to Arizona.

Which brings us to this year's presidential run. While the bulk of the media attention has been on such weighty matters as who's wearing or not wearing flag lapel pins, there's been little focus on the back rooms where the money is being raised. So, in this issue of the Lowdown, we take a peek, finding the predictable, the ironic, and the surprising. [ read more ]

FROM THE "LAND OF THE CLUELESS AND CONNIVING," meet a couple of gentlemen who insist that America's political funding system is working splendidly. They report that there's absolutely nothing going on between the money interests and our lawmakers in Washington that should trouble our fuzzy little minds.

First up is one Paul Miller, president of the American League of Lobbyists (bet you didn't know that lobbying is now such an industry in Washington that they've formed a lobby group for lobbyists!). He offers this insight:

"Our government is not corrupt, lobbyists are not bribing people, and members of Congress are not being bought for campaign contributions. I don't think we can say for certainty that the current system is broken."

Gosh, I wonder if he can say "TomDeLay JackAbramoff DukeCunningham" with certainty...or a straight face?

Next comes Ben Barr, who's from a pro-corporate Arizona think tank called the Goldwater Institute. In an interview last October on the PBS television show "NOW," he shared this wisdom:

NOW: Do you think money is a problem in politics under the traditional system?

Barr: No, I do not. Money is speech.

NOW: But, surely money can also distort speech....

Barr: That's the price of freedom.... Speech costs money.

Follow the bouncing logic: Speech costs money; money distorts speech; distorted speech is freedom. [ read more ]