January 24, 2010
Rules change!
As kids we played softball in the street almost every day. The rules were clearly understood. Most of us were out after three strikes; it was four balls for a walk; "99 fouls" and you were out! But one kid brought the bats, balls and gloves. He got more than three strikes. He remained at bat until he got a hit. He walked on three balls, and when he went home the game ended.
If there was a close call at home involving the bat owner the game ended early unless we accepted his version of the situation. He was the classic bully, and eventually we brought our own equipment and everyone obeyed the three-strike-four-ball rules.
Would that we could look at the Supreme Court's FEC decision with the simplicity of kids playing pick-up baseball. Bring our equipment--better candidates, grassroots campaigns, better ideas. But we can't win even if we do, because in the game of politics the big kids own the TV and radio studios; they have unlimited resources; they have the big law firms parading behind the flag of the First Amendment when the black flag of piracy would be more appropriate; and, well, let's face it, we now enter into the cesspool of corporate control. Ultimately, the big corporations will completely dominate our Legislature, Congress, the lower courts, the White House. They will re-district, decide who pays taxes and who doesn't. It is only a question of when not whether.
The Washington Post interviewed the $800-per-hour law firms--Foley & Lardner, Covington & Burling, Skadden Arps--who, surprise, surprise, urge us to be calm. One argued that these are tough economic times so big corporations won't jump in immediately. Some consolation! The bully will, for now, settle for a three-ball walk and only five strikes! Gosh! Are we lucky or what?
This decision, that corporations have the same First Amendment rights as a living, breathing, citizen, is contrived, loopy and wrong. But it will alter our politics completely. It has not been a fair fight for decades in our money-dominated-corrupt political system, but we could win. Grassroots mattered, the quality of the candidate was considered. Not any more.
Don't feel relaxed when the Washington crowd tells you the change is minor--it ain't. It is a game changer. It is rule-by-bully!
Well, we have no choice but to fight. See you at Fighting Bob Fest on September 11 in Baraboo.
post a letter about this blog »
I had a dream the other night that I was swinging on a trapeze. Momentum was building and just as I let go of the trapeze of the past and reached for the trapeze of the future, I looked down and saw the safety net of the constitution unraveling.
Just then the alarm went off. I woke up and sure enough, someone's been tinkering with our constitution again.
If justices of the Supreme Court cannot protect and uphold the Constitution, I fear it will no longer be this democracy's safety net.
-Franz Fripplfrappl | Stoughton, WI | January 24, 2010
There is a simple solution. Outlaw political advertising on television and radio and permit it only in print. This could even resuscitate the newspapers.
-Blurondo | Wauwatosa, WI | January 24, 2010
One of the corrective avenues being considered is a Constitutional Amendment banning corporate campaign contributions. Great idea!
But why stop there?
Wouldn't this be an opportune time to bring back a Glass-Stegall Act?
And while we are at it.... since some of Wall Street's banks were deemed "too big to fail" that obviously needs to be addressed.
Break those behemoths up into more easily regulated entities.
Maybe I'm a dreamer.
But if so, why not dream big?
The icing on the reform cake for me would be a return to corporate charters.
We could go from the United Corporatocry of America to the good ol' U.S.of A where our public servants in Washington serve "We the People" rather than selling out to highest bidder.
-J.P. the Populist | Bruce,WI | January 24, 2010
current
--------
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003