All Hail Trump the King!

After hearing the latest news today about the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump could fire just about any government employee he wanted to without cause, my spouse Karen suggested “Why don’t we just crown him king.”  “That’s a GOOD idea I replied.”  The courts have already said that he is immune from prosecution for any wrongdoing while in office.  In New York, he was told ten times during his trial that he was in danger of being charged with “Contempt of Court”, but it never happened.  The chicken shit judge was afraid to do anything. 

Our Congress bends over backwards to support anything Trump wants including a “Great Big Beautiful Bill” that will kick many people off Medicare benefits.  Punish people too disabled to find work and give tax breaks to the top ten percent of Americans.  Only two-House Republicans voted against the bill and that was probably because they were afraid it would increase the deficit.  Either that or they feared violence by Trump and his supporters.  Trump has Senators afraid to disagree with him.  Senator Lisa Murkowski admitted that she is terrified of retaliation from President Trump and his supporters.  No doubt that feeling is shared among many in the House and Senate. 

Almost every major economist in the USA said this new tax bill would increase the deficit but that did not deter Congress from giving money to their benefactors.  They pushed more money into the military-industrial-complex and the Border Patrol and took it away from the lower income earners.  I heard a Republican on NPR this morning say that the big waste is in entitlement programs including Education, Social Security and Healthcare.  No one calls our bloated military budget an “entitlement” program for major corporations, nor do they call our growing Border Patrol an entitlement program. 

I would sooner fund welfare recipients than drones or smart bombs that are programmed to stalk and kill other human beings.  Please don’t call me a pacifist or disloyal.  Unlike Trump, I volunteered for military service in September of 1964 and served until October of 1968.  I volunteered three times for Vietnam.  If any true crisis emerged, I would not hesitate to defend our country.  However, a military budget that ranks as the number one in the world and is equal to the next ten budgets combined is absurd.  I also have little or no use for creating a border wall and border security to deny privileges written in the US Constitution.  Once upon a time, there was no wall, no border patrol, no security checks, no internment camps and things worked out fine. 

We are now creating a Space Force and high-powered lasers so that we can place them on the moon and Mars.  Do you know why?  I bet you can guess.  Here is a hint.  It has to do with some billionaires who are making fortunes with their space programs. 

I asked ChatGPT the following question:  Did either Musk, Bezos or Zuckerberg serve in the military?  Here is the answer that I received to my inquiry:

Elon Musk

Elon Musk did not serve in the military.  He left South Africa at the age of 17, partly to avoid mandatory conscription under the apartheid regime.

Jeff Bezos

Jeff Bezos has never served in the military.  His background is rooted in academics and business.

Mark Zuckerberg

Mark Zuckerberg has no military service record.  There have been no credible reports or evidence suggesting any military involvement.  His focus has been on technology and business since his early years .

I hope you are not surprised by these results.  Uber-Rich people including most politicians seem to find the idea of joining the military very repugnant.  Fighting and dying is for poor people or people so unconnected that they are eventually sucked into the Army or Marines where they can be sent to the front lines and when dead or disabled awarded with an array of medals.

I again asked ChatGPT a question.  “Is there any data related to the socio-economic status of soldiers who died or were wounded in combat during the Vietnam War and the Gulf Wars versus soldiers who were not?”  Here is a summary of the reply that I received:

Comparative Summary

ConflictRecruitment SystemSES Profile of TroopsCasualties & SES
Vietnam WarDraft + volunteersLower to working classDisproportionately lower SES, especially early in war
Gulf WarsAll-volunteerLower to middle classMiddle/lower-middle class more represented in casualties
    

SES stands for Socio Economic Status.  Most of the studies on my question found that the poor, the less educated, and people from geographically disadvantaged rural areas had more deaths and injuries.

“A study published in the American Journal of Public Health includes a figure illustrating the relationship between state per capita income and Vietnam War combat casualties.  The analysis indicates that states with lower per capita incomes experienced higher casualty rates, highlighting a socio-economic disparity in war fatalities.” — PubMed

I point out the above data to illustrate the growing gap between the rulers in this country and the ruled. The golden rule could never be more firmly implanted than it is today.  “He or she who has the gold makes the rules.”  The rulers eat, drink and live in palatial mansions that most of us cannot even imagine.  The rulers live on boats bigger than our schools.  They eat at restaurants that would not allow someone of my income level to be near the food except maybe to pick up the trash.  Most people I know would be happy to have take home bags from these places.  

Just for the record, our (Spouse and I) combined income puts us in the 45th percentile, meaning our income is slightly below the national median, but higher than about 45% of U.S. households.  Thus, we are not poor, but we are pretty far from being rich considering that 55 percent of American families have higher incomes than we do.  Just for fun, I calculated how much Jeff Bezos makes per year and obtained the following result which includes his salaries, profits and earnings growth.

Based on his net worth growth, Jeff Bezos earns $9.6 billion a year—or $798,333,333 a month.  To break this down even further, that’s $26,611,111 a day, $1,108,796 an hour, $18,480 a minute—and $308 a second.  In comparison, both Karen and I make $7.62 per hour or “$183 dollars per day.   Bezos makes almost twice as much in one second as I make in a day. 

But getting back to the rich a-holes who are destroying our American Democracy, why continue the charade?  Stephen Miller or J.D. Vance can nominate Trump for King, and I will second the motion.  Think of the happiness this would bring to the billionaires who support Trump.  Think of the joy amongst his followers who never believed in democracy in the first place.  Think of the sycophants who can now stop kissing his ass and can simply run rampant over the rest of us.  At least two of them have floated a bill to include Trump at Mount Rushmore.

The Supreme Court can crown Trump “The Most Beautiful King” who ever lived by a six to three majority.  The Senate leadership has already given up the idea that checks and balances should limit the power of the President.  Why say we have a president?  If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.  Anyone who can say Fuck You to the Supreme Court, Kiss My ASS to the Congress and put FEAR into the hearts of academics, lawyers and government officials with his threats of Vengeance and Retribution is not a president.  By any measure I can think of they are a violent, narcissistic Dictator. 

King George move over for King Trump.

The Supreme Court Has Murdered the Constitution  — BY RYAN COOPER   JULY 4, 2024

images

Constitutional fetish worship has been a feature of American politics from practically the moment it was enacted. This document, entirely by accident, serves as a core source of government legitimacy, despite the fact that it was hurriedly slapped together over a few months and never worked as intended, not even at the beginning.

It would be a good thing if we had less reverence for the Constitution, allowing us to go about perfecting it democratically, through a deliberative process of representatives of the people. Instead, we get the worst of all possible worlds: a culture of Constitution worship that resists change, yet also massive alterations to the founding document, entirely from unelected men and women in robes.

In short, if you want to change the Constitution, you get the Supreme Court to rewrite it for you. That only requires five justices to exercise the rule-by-decree powers they have arrogated to themselves, instead of the incredibly cumbersome amendment process requiring two-thirds of the Senate and House, and three-quarters of the states, which is impossible in our hyper-polarized times. As Thomas Jefferson once wrote, under judicial review, the Constitution “is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.”

Now, one of the central arguments in favor of judicial review is that it is necessary to protect individual constitutional rights from being eroded by the legislature. So let’s look at both sides of the equation, read through the Constitution, and compile a non-exhaustive list of the ragged holes the Supreme Court has blasted in it, through action or inaction.

Article I, Section 1: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…” The Court has gradually stolen this power from Congress over the years. The recent decisions Relentless v. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which the Court seized control of the entire administrative state, are just the capstones.

Article I, Section 2: “The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States…” In Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, the Court has signed off on egregious gerrymandering so “the People” in an increasing number of Republican states have little or nothing to do with who is elected to the House.

Article I, Section 3: The last paragraph in this section makes clear that the formal punishment for impeachment is only removal from office and prohibition from holding office again, but also that “the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.” This language obviously takes for granted that presidents can be prosecuted for criminal acts, which the Roberts Court has recently forbidden (see below).

Article I, Section 4: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations…” Sorry Congress, no election regulations if John Roberts doesn’t like them. In Shelby County v. Holder, which removed most of the strictures preventing southern states from engaging in Jim Crow-era voter suppression, Roberts didn’t even bother to cite the Constitution. Afterwards, of course, southern Republicans immediately started disenfranchising minorities once more.

Article I, Section 7: This grants the House the famous power of the purse, stipulating that “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” Except not anymore, at least if you’re President Donald Trump, in which case the Roberts Court will kindly let you steal $6 billion from the military to build random sections of border wall.

Article I, Section 8: This enumerates Congress’s powers that, once again, are now possessed by the judiciary. The legislature can make rules if and only if they don’t run afoul of the Court’s political views.

Article II: This entire article, which outlines the fairly modest explicit powers of the president, is dead, dead, dead. In Trump v. United States, Roberts has anointed the president as a king formally above the law, immune from prosecution for everything he does as president, and who can therefore imprison or murder his political opponents with impunity. Roberts may as well have dug up James Madison’s corpse and micturated directly into the eye sockets.

That said, it’s still worth emphasizing that the Court has also deleted both of the Constitution’s anti-bribery clauses for the president. Article I, Section 1 says the president “shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them,” while Article II, Section 9 says that no one holding federal office can “accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

In office, Trump funneled unknown but vast quantities of federal money, as well as that of foreign governments, into his own pockets through his various properties. The Roberts Court deliberately ran out the clock on a case invoking the Emoluments Clause on Trump and then dismissed it, making it clear that it’s fine and dandy for the president to loot the government, or take massive bribes from foreign powers.

Article III: It’s worth noting there is no explicit mention of judicial review in the Constitution anywhere.

Article IV, Section 4: This says the “United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,” but again, the Court has not only stood aside as Republicans set up flagrantly rigged, authoritarian state election systems, but also helped them out.

The total abolition of Article II is certainly the worst thing the Roberts Court has done by a wide margin.

On to the Bill of Rights! First Amendment protections for freedom of worship, speech, and the press are under an all-out assault from right-wing state legislatures. The “ten commandments” (not the actual ones, incidentally) are being set up on government property across several states. Bigoted restraints on the speech rights of teachers and professors have swept the country. Mississippi is persecuting reporters for uncovering flagrant welfare fraud on the part of the state Republican regime. The Court is doing nothing about any of this.

The Second Amendment is not so much dead so much as metastasized in the Roberts Court petri dish, cancer-like, into a sweeping grant of gun rights that every one of the founding fathers would have regarded with slack-jawed horror. It obviously does not protect, and was not intended to protect, an individual right to own as many fully automatic weapons as you like in preparation for your upcoming workplace massacre. But under the Roberts Court that’s what it has become.

The Fourth Amendment’s protection of unreasonable searches and seizures has been steadily eroded by the Court. Any savvy law enforcement officer can easily search your property or read your private communications.

The Fifth Amendment’s requirement that no one be deprived of “life, liberty, or property” without due process of law does not apply to growing categories of citizens. President Obama set up a drone assassination program that killed American citizens, while Trump sent a straight-up death squad to summarily execute the leftist Michael Reinoehl after he shot and killed a far-right activist during an altercation, and Trump repeatedly boasted about it. Again, the Court did nothing in either case.

The right guaranteed in the Sixth and Seventh Amendments to fair jury trials for accused criminals is a dead letter. More than 95 percent of criminal cases end in a plea bargain. The Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment is a dead letter too, especially if you happen to be homeless. Right-wing states can torture people to death with the Court’s blessing.

The Fourteenth Amendment is mostly toast. As to Section 1, states are abridging the “privileges and immunities” of citizens right and left, due process protections are increasingly abridged, and numerous groups, from transgender people to pregnant women and others, are suffering explicit legal discrimination without so much as a peep from the Court. Section 2, which requires that states which disenfranchise their citizens lose representation in the House, has never been enforced. The Roberts Court recently deleted Section 3, which forbids traitors and rebels from serving in the government, once again to protect Donald Trump from accountability.

The Fifteenth Amendment’s prohibition against disenfranchising people based on race is gone. Not only will the court happily allow GOP states to gerrymander their Black citizens into permanent electoral irrelevance, as noted above the Court also prohibits Congress from doing anything about it.

I could go on, but the point is made.

The total abolition of Article II is certainly the worst thing the Roberts Court has done by a wide margin. It is the worst Supreme Court decision since Plessy v. Ferguson or perhaps even Dred Scott v. Stanford. The intention, obviously, is to pave the way for a Trump dictatorship, like some Enabling Act passed before Hitler actually took power. But it’s in keeping with the thrust of Roberts’ jurisprudence since the moment he was confirmed.

It all calls to mind Alexander Hamilton’s famous argument in Federalist #78 that the judiciary “will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them,” in that it controls neither the military nor the budget. The “general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter,” he concluded.

Standing hip-deep in the shreds of constitutional rights that John Roberts and his corrupt, illegitimate cronies have torn up, we can conclude that Hamilton was utterly, completely wrong. But he was right that the Court only has power insofar as Congress and the president agree they do. Perhaps it’s time to reconsider that state of affairs.

Ryan Cooper is the Prospect’s managing editor, and author of ‘How Are You Going to Pay for That?: Smart Answers to the Dumbest Question in Politics.’ He was previously a national correspondent for The Week.

 

 

 

 

 

The Hell with the Pigs

5131a_t715

“Give me my eggs over easy with a slice of bacon on the side.”  “I don’t give a damn how the pigs are raised as long as the bacon is well done.”

A recent lawsuit by the National Pork Producers Council and the American Farm Bureau Federation seeks to overturn a lower court ruling that specifies more humane conditions for the cages in which pigs are kept.  “If you’re looking for an example of an unconstitutional law, this is it,” said Michael Formica, chief legal strategist for the pork producers.

Michael-Formica

I scratch my head in disbelief at Formica’s statement, not to mention his callous opportunistic disregard for how these poor animals destined to be slaughtered for his slice of bacon are kept.  Just another fat white middle-aged lawyer ready to take up his legal cudgel to defend our right to bacon, sausage, and pork chops.  But more importantly to defend the rights of industry to make profits regardless of who or what is hurt in the effort.

Formica claims that the US Constitution defends this right.  Another legal escapism from what I am sure the founders of this country had no intention to protect.  Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, and Franklin would have been appalled at the notion of CAFOS (Concentrated Animal Feed Operations).  Industry designed operations built for the sole purpose of keeping prices low and making huge profits.

60e61ac9988bb.image

In Polk County Wisconsin, we have been waging a four-year battle to try to regulate these CAFOS and keep them from destroying the environment.  It has been an uphill battle as the never-ending lawsuits from pork producers are like unlimited cannon balls coming at well intentioned but unprotected and outgunned citizen groups.  The law that Formica wants to challenge was passed in California on a 2018 ballot initiative written by voters to bar sales in California of pork, veal, and eggs from animals whose confinement failed to meet minimum space requirements.

If you are a vegan or vegetarian, which I am not, you are no doubt more concerned about the welfare of these poor caged animals then you are about the price of bacon or even the environmental impacts of these animal concentration camps.

maxresdefault

I asked Porky the Pig what he thought of these operations.  Porky is representing the Voters of California against Formica’s and the Pig Industries challenge to the California Law which (Also unbelievably) has worked its way up to the US Supreme Court.  “Pork industry takes fight over California law to U.S. Supreme Court” – By Leah Douglas, October 10,2022

The Supreme Court stands ever ready to defend big business against even the most bizarre and frivolous lawsuits ever conceived.  An institution that was once a bulwark against infringements to civil liberties has become a pimp for any business with enough money to hire a scumbag lawyer.  A legal whiz who with no humanity or morality will develop esoteric arguments to protect his/her clients rights to make a profit regardless of what economists call “externalities.”  The definition of an externality is “A side effect or consequence of an industrial or commercial activity that affects other parties without this being reflected in the cost of the goods or services involved.”  Global Warming and Climate Change are an egregious example of externalities that are now costing the world billions of lives and dollars.  An externality to pigs and cows is simply abuse and murder.

download

Porky the Pig told me that he has lost many family members, friends, and other relatives to these CAFO operations.  The basis for his defense against Formica’s lawsuit rests not on econometric issues such as supply and demand but on the sheer inhumanity of the way pigs are kept prior to being slaughtered.  Porky was somewhat indifferent to the eventual slaughter of pigs for food.  “John,” he said to me, “We all have to go sometime.  However, like humans it is not when we go but how that really bothers us.  To spend our entire life in a cage that is so confining, we cannot even turn around, that is no way to live.  Your famous Patrick Henry echoed a sentiment that is our rallying cry.  ‘Give us liberty or give us death.’”

I left Porky feeling very guilty.  I don’t know if I want to give up bacon and eggs.  I do know that I would be willing to pay more for my bacon and sausage to know that Porky and his family had been treated humanly before being slaughtered.  Once upon a time, we knew that a nation could not have both guns and butter.  You had to make a choice.  Like not being able to have your cake and eat it.  We seem to have forgotten that lesson.  Or we are unwilling to make a choice?  We want cheap food, but we also want to spend trillions of dollars on our defense industry.  We want low priced bacon and eggs but high-priced missiles and bombs.  When will the people in this country wake up?  As Patrick Henry also said,

“What is it that you wish?  What would you have?  Is bacon so dear, or sausage so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of brutality and cruelty?  Forbid it, Almighty God!

PS:

Received the following message from a friend of mine in Wisconsin on November 4, 2022. It concerns a new development in the ongoing war against a CAFO in Northwestern Wisconsin. She has been very active in the effort to block allowing CAFO’S without more government regulation. This letter illustrates the ongoing battles I referred to in my blog with big business allied against us average folks.

Dear John,

Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce (WMC) served the Town of Laketown with a lawsuit this week. Their billionaire members want the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) Ordinance several local towns have passed, rescinded.

WMC’s complaint mirrors their April 19, 2022 Notice of Claim. However, they ditched the nudist colony as a proxy plaintiff. They are still using the Byl and Spoestra farms as proxies. The lead plaintiff is Mike Byl, convicted for illegal dumping in 2018. WMC argues that local governments may only use Wisconsin Statute 93.90, the ridiculously weak law they wrote, to regulate giant livestock factories.

For more information, please see the attached documents:

1.      Case Summary – 10.12.22

2.      Summons and Complaint – 10.12.22

3.      Notice of Claim – 4.19.22

4.      Mike Byl Conviction – 7.23.18

The law firms of Bassford Remele and Fredrikson Byron, are representing Laketown.

A copy of the ordinance is available on Laketown’s website: Town of Laketown | Polk County, WI

Of course, this is just the latest of many attacks that the WMC is making around the state to intimidate local officials. In Kewaunee County, WMC helped fuel a decade of litigation for the giant Kinnard 8,000-cow dairy. In that case, these behemoths say they don’t need to do any well monitoring even though they are spreading raw feces and urine over 16,000 acres. That is 25 sections of land or almost 3/4 of a township! 

Wisconsin’s Big Ag is now using a convicted polluter from Laketown to argue that local governments can’t protect their citizens’ health or property values. We are proud that Laketown’s leaders and citizens are willing and able to derail them.

Sincerely –  

It’s the Economy Stupid! The Five Myths of Capitalism – Part 1 of 5

money

There are many theories about what drives progress and change in the world.  Some say Ideology changes the world.  Some say Technology is the main driver of change.  Karl Marx, one of the most famous or infamous men in history, (depending on your beliefs) argued that Economics is the main driver of change in the world.  Much of Marx’s theory is summed up by the term Historical Materialism which can be defined as:

“A theory of history which states that a society’s economic organization fundamentally determines its social institutions and the way that people live and benefit from the means of production in that society.”

marxism-capitalism-1-638Most of what people learn about Marx is far removed from his actual ideas.  Given that Capitalism has been diametrically opposed to the very name of Karl Marx, it is not surprising that he is routinely disparaged.  Even at the University level, it is rare to find anyone studying Marx very deeply.   Many educators and instructors describe Marx’s economic theories as “Totally Discredited.”  Few people in America have any good words for Karl Marx.  Any politician in the USA who might suggest that Marx ever said one good thing or had one good idea would court instant political death.  Marx is the devil in our Capitalistic system.

the economyMarx did of course hate capitalism.  He saw Capitalism as a system that exploited workers and allowed the greedy to benefit at the expense of those less fortunate or less aggressive.

“Capitalism: Teach a man to fish, but the fish he catches aren’t his. They belong to the person paying him to fish, and if he’s lucky, he might get paid enough to buy a few fish for himself.”  — Karl Marx

10665231_470379489743928_2447670465163187643_nThe antipathy directed towards Marx and his critique of Capitalism has discouraged any real in-depth understanding of the limits and myths of Capitalism by most Americans.  Capitalism resides in America on the same level as Mom, God, and Apple Pie.  Woe to anyone who would dare to attack Capitalism.  In the United States, Capitalism is as hallowed an institution as Christianity.  In fact, most Christians think that Capitalism and religion go hand in hand, which to a large extent they sadly do.  Unfortunately, not all Capitalism is the same.  In America, we have a home-grown version that is more appropriately called Corporate Capitalism.  What is the difference you might ask?  Well it gets even more complicated since economists define four types of Capitalism.  These are:  oligarchic capitalism, state-guided capitalism, big-firm capitalism, entrepreneurial capitalism.  The type of Capitalism that I am going to talk about is known as Big Firm Capitalism or Corporate Capitalism.  It has been defined as:

“Corporate capitalism is characterized by the dominance of hierarchical and bureaucratic corporations… A large proportion of the economy of the United States and its labor market falls within corporate control.  In the developed world, corporations dominate the marketplace, comprising 50% or more of all businesses.  Those businesses which are not corporations contain the same bureaucratic structure of corporations, but there is usually a sole owner or group of owners who are liable to bankruptcy and criminal charges relating to their business. Corporations have limited liability and remain less regulated and accountable than sole proprietorships.” — Wikipedia

Before we proceed further, you need to understand one thing.  I am not against corporations per se.  We gain many benefits from corporations.  Corporations are a large part of the foundation of our economy which from strictly a monetary perspective has been phenomenally successful.  The USA has perhaps the most successful economy in history.  I have no problems with the monetary contributions of corporations.

globalization

The problems arise however, in that there are Myths of Corporate Capitalism which serve to hide the negative impacts that corporations have on our country and the rest of the world.  Today, corporations are global entities and their excesses are felt not just in this country but all over the globe.  I believe that unless these excesses are reined in by intelligent oversight and a rewriting of corporate law, they will destroy this country.  Each of these excesses is a Deadly Disease that by itself could do the destruction.  Together these five excesses are leading America away from the vision of our founding fathers.  Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were based on the belief in a democratic system of government that was of the people, by the people and for the people.  We are increasingly standing by while our country becomes a government of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation.

The Five Myths of Corporate Capitalism that are destroying America:

  1. Corporations are people

supreme court decisionOver the past 40 years, the Supreme Court has radically expanded constitutional rights for corporations.  The original charters for corporations written in the late 19th century, allowed corporations powers never before seen in companies.  The abuse of these powers soon led to a considerable amount of legislation designed to reign in some of the most egregious of these abuses.  Laws such as the Sherman Anti-Trust Act passed in 1890 to stop monopoly practices and the Clayton Antitrust Act passed in 1914 to stop unethical business practices were somewhat successful at ameliorating corporate abuses.  Unfortunately, corporations were still left with considerable power to thwart the goals of democracy and good government.

From the early 20th Century onwards, corporations continued to use their power to bribe, cajole, and persuade policy makers to give them privileges that once again extended their power. They have since more than made up for the power that they lost in the early part of the 20th century.

“Today, the biggest companies have upwards of 100 lobbyists representing them, allowing them to be everywhere, all the time.  For every dollar spent on lobbying by labor unions and public-interest groups together, large corporations and their associations now spend $34.  Of the 100 organizations that spend the most on lobbying, 95 consistently represent business.”  — “How Corporate Lobbyists Conquered American Democracy” — The Atlantic, Lee Drutman, April 20, 2015.  

corporate powerCorporate interests easily dominate the interests of the common person.  The common person has nowhere near the financial clout of corporations.  In 2010, the Supreme Court passed the Citizens United Decision which gave corporations unlimited power to finance and support political candidates running for office as well as to lobby on behalf of any laws that they wanted.  This decision basically upheld the idea that corporations had a right to free speech much like any citizen of the USA and that campaign spending was simply a manifestation of free speech.  Corporations are now being treated as living breathing people despite the fact that corporations can live forever, and corporations are not organic entities.  They are not born, and they do not die like any other creature on the face of the earth.

lobbyists

Corporations already had almost unlimited power to influence and coerce politicians to do their will.  The Citizens United Decision took all the brakes out of the system.  You have often heard the parody of the Golden Rule “He who has the gold makes the rules.”  This trope is now a fact of life in America.  Many people no longer bother voting because they believe that voting is a waste of time.  Everyone knows that politicians need an exorbitant amount of money to support their campaign and that once elected they immediately start building their money up for their reelection.   They get the lion’s share of this money from big business interests and associations that support big business interests such as the National Rifle Association (NRA).

AP_ArentPeople_Meme-300x300

According to campaign finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission that cover activity from January 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019, congressional candidates collected $389 million and disbursed $172.2 million, political parties received $353.7 million and spent $279.9 million, and political action committees (PACs) raised $958.2 million and spent $818.7 million in the six-month period.  If you total these figures up for money raised in just the first six months of 2019, it equals $1.701 billion dollars.  If there were 100 people in the US Senate and 435 people in the US House of Representatives, this equals approximately $3,179,400 dollars for every one of those politicians in office.  Of course, some will get more, and some will get less, but the majority of this money will be spent helping to support the reelection of each and every one of these honorable men and women.

corporations-rule-ic-5-26-2017

Here is a little experiment to show you what this campaign funding could buy.  Consider that the Federal Minimum Wage in the United States as of 2020 is $10 dollars per hour.  A person on minimum wage working full time earns approximately $21,000 dollars a year.  According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1. 8 million Americans work full-time at or below the minimum wage.  If you double the average election campaign fund to equal a full year of collecting money you will get approximately $6.2 million dollars.  Now divide this campaign fund by the average yearly minimum wage of $21 thousand dollars and you get 295.  In other words, one year of campaign funding (an average) would fund a person now working on minimum wage for 295 years.   If you earn the national average of $86,000 dollars a year, it could support you for 72 years.

To say that something is wrong here is an understatement.  We have a sort of self-perpetuating money machine here.  Every year corporations get greedier and seek more profits.  According to Corporate Law that is their primary reason for existence.  Numerous pundits and corporate sympathizers extol the virtue of greed.

Workers Should Be Very Thankful That Corporations Are So Greedy” by Jeffrey Dorfman

greed is goodOne of the most popular movies in the eighties was Wall Street.  In the movie, Michael Douglas gave a “Greed is Good” speech which was actually applauded by audiences all over the United States.  Some corporations have been sued by stockholders for not being greedy enough.

Every year budding politicians need more and more money to get elected.  Corporations are money banks for anyone desiring to run for office.  Corporations provide the funds that politicians need to wage a successful election campaign.  Once elected, elected officials are then beholden to the major corporations and lobbyists whose help they will need to raise the money to get reelected.

Corporations are more than happy to support candidates who will pass bills that help them to make more profits.  Other bills they like are designed to ensure that they can pay less taxes, have fewer environmental regulations, fewer safety and health regulations, pay lower wages, decrease employee pensions and benefits, defeat unions and avoid onerous consumer liability claims.  Any politician who is willing to support the former goals can find numerous corporate lobbyists willing to donate money to help them get elected.  The Citizens United Decision guarantees that corporations can give as much money as they want without breaking any laws.  After all, it is free speech.

0_x4jON4VvbNOVEOEy

“Warren Buffett worth nearly $80 billion dollars points to the Forbes 400, which lists the wealthiest Americans.  ‘Between the first computation in 1982 and today, the wealth of the 400 increased 29-fold — from $93 billion to $2.7 trillion — while many millions of hardworking citizens remained stuck on an economic treadmill.  During this period, the tsunami of wealth didn’t trickle down.  It surged upward’.”  — Entrepreneurs, January 24th, 2018

In Part 2, I am going to cover the second myth of Corporate Capitalism.  The Myth that laissez faire will somehow result in corporations being self-regulating entities for the common good.

“According to a survey from the Pew Research Center last year, 60 percent of American adults think that three decades from now, the U.S. will be less powerful than it is today. Almost two-thirds say it will be even more divided politically. Fifty-nine percent think the environment will be degraded. Nearly three-quarters say that the gap between the haves and have-nots will be wider. A plurality expects the average family’s standard of living to have declined. Most of us, presumably, have recently become acutely aware of the danger of global plagues.”  — The Atlantic, Kate Julian, April 17, 2020

I think you will enjoy my five part series. I write for the understanding of the average person and not necessarily the economist or the Ph.D. However, if you want a more rigorous and thoroughly detailed analysis of the problems with the Capitalist system. See the following study by the Roosevelt Institute.

https://rooseveltinstitute.org/publications/new-rules-for-the-21st-century-corporate-power-public-power-future-american-economy/#:~:text=In%20New%20Rules%20for%20the,thinking%20about%20the%20role%20of