Democracy. Endangered. - Seattle Washington › Documents › accesstojustice › ... · a record amount of secret money, flooding our democracy; and a public becoming increasingly

Democracy.Democracy.Democracy.Democracy.

Endangered.Endangered.Endangered.Endangered.

Do we haveDo we haveDo we haveDo we haveREAL Democracy ?REAL Democracy ?REAL Democracy ?REAL Democracy ?

Democracy:

a political form of governmentin whichin whichin whichin which governing poweris is is is derived from the people

( appeared in Greek city-states cerca 5th century B.C. )

Great American democracy experiment ...Great American democracy experiment ...Great American democracy experiment ...Great American democracy experiment ...

"We the People ... (the Constitution, 1787)

"The Bill of Rights ..." (first 10 amendments)

One person = One voteand ...

Elected Members of Congress( representative democracy )

Core documents here: www.gpoaccess.gov/coredocs.html

Has "the great American experiment"

in DEMOCRACY been hijacked ... ??

... skewed by mountains of special-interest $$$

Are we entering an age of (legalized)

corporate rule – through “purchased” elections ??

"We may have democracy,or we may have wealth concentrated

in the hands of a few,

but we can't have both."

-- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis

2010 Elections

Factors affecting the outcome ...

� Economy on the skids > worry, fear, anti-tax sentiment

� Drowning in (special-interest) money ...

� Sufficient civic awareness (by voters) ?

(was there balanced coverage of issues?)

Did "the people" really speak ?

“2010 elections ... the biggest commercial transaction in the history of American elections.

“Once again the plutocracy is buying off the system.

“Nearly $4 billion [has been] spent on the congressional races ... including multi millions coming from independent tax-exempt organizations that can collect unlimited amounts without revealing the sources.

-- Bill Moyers (Speech at Boston University, October 29, 2010)

Campaign spending 2010: Over $ 4.2 BILLION expected

As of late September ...federal candidates spent $209 million on media,

$85 million increase over the $124 million that had been spent at the

same time during the 2006 midterms

The rest expected to easily surpass the midterm record of $4.2 billion will

come from third-party groups, unions and corporate interests

Money spent just on independent expenditures --messages that overtly advocate for or against a specific candidate --has nearly tripled between the 2006 and 2010 cycles -- $34 million to date.

Sources --

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43171.html

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/10/outside-political-spending-skyrocke.html

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976)

The Supreme Court of the United States upheld a federal law

(1974 amendments to 1971 Federal Elections Campaign Act)

which set limits on campaign contributions,

but ruled that spending money to influence elections

is a form of constitutionally protected free speech,

( and so the ruling struck down portions of the law).

The court also stated

candidates can give unlimited amounts of money

to their own campaigns.

Citizens United ruling: February, 2010

Overturned:

�Laws or rules that prohibit corporations and unions from spending treasury money on ads that

advocate electing or defeating candidates for president or Congress but are produced

independently and not coordinated with the candidate's campaign.

�The prohibition in BCRA that prohibits issue-oriented ads paid for by corporations or unions

30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election.

Upheld:

�The ban on donations by corporations from their treasuries directly to candidates.

�The ability of corporations, unions or individuals to set up PACs that can contribute directly to

candidates but can only accept voluntary contributions from employees, members and others

and cannot use money directly from corporate or union treasuries.

�The McCain-Feingold provision that anyone spending money on political ads must disclose

the names of contributors.

Top Groups Making Outside Expenditures in 2010 Elections:(reported to date)

National Republican Congressional Cmte $34 mil

Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte $26 mil

U.S. Chamber of Commerce $23 mil

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte $22 mil

American Action Network $16 mil

American Crossroads $13 mil

Service Employees International Union $10 mil

American Future Fund $ 8 mil

National Republican Senatorial Cmte $ 8 mil

American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $ 8 mil

“A tiny number of organizations, relying on a tiny number of corporate and fat cat contributors, are spending most of the money on the vicious attack ads dominating the airwaves”

-- Robert Wiessman. President, Public Citizen

$ Raised for Ballot Initiatives - WA State, 2010

( including $$ spent to gain signatures,and then ads and voter persuasion )

Special-interests (corporate self-interest) provide $$

to skew voter information and voting outcomes.

Examples:

Initiative 1107 - Repeal sales tax on candy, sodaProponents raised/provided over $14 million ...

... 99+% of contributions from American Beverage Assoc.

Initiative 1082 - Privatize Workers Compensation in WA

Major proponents are: Liberty Mutual Insurance (backed by A.I.G.)

Lawmaking (public policy) FOR SALE

WHY ...

... is High Fructose Corn Syrup in 75% of all sweet food ?(adding to obesity and diabetes at young age)

... is health coverage dominated by for-profit insurance ?

... did A.I.G. (and Goldman-Sachs) receive huge bailouts ?

... was the Glass-Steagall Act repealed ?

... is Wall Street (derivatives, etc.) so loosely regulated ?

... do corporate oil, gas and coal companies

dominate the nation's energy policy ?

... do "defense" contractors dominate the Pentagon

and procurement/arms spending in the U.S. ?

... are our nation's airwaves and news outlets dominated

by a handful of multinational media corporations ?

"I believe in the division of labor.

You send us to Congress;

we pass laws under which you make money...

And out of your profits, you further contribute

to our campaign funds

to send us back again to pass more laws

to enable you to make more money."

-- Senator Boies Penrose (R-Pa.), 1896,

citing the relationship between his politics and big business.

In 1896, he raised a quarter million dollars in 48 hours

for his election campaign

Bribery:

Offering money or a favor to a person in a position of trust

to influence that person's conduct

Extortion:

Obtaining money or some other thing of value

by the abuse of one's office or authority

Campaign contributions - by special interests:

-- ??

Return on Lobbying Investment: It PAYS !

Firms pushing for a "tax holiday" in 2004,

received a 22,000 % return on their lobbying investment.

93 firms spent as much as $282.7 million in 2003/4,

to push through a one-time tax "holiday"

that lowered for a year the tax rate they paidon profits earned abroad,

and ultimately saved a total of $62.5 billion

through the tax change.

University of Kansas study (2009), reported by the Sunlight Foundation Blog:

http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com/2009/04/09/return-on-lobbying-investment-22000

Smoking Gun ...

How finance industry lobbying led to economic meltdown

Financial services industry spent more than $5 billion on federal campaign

contributions and lobbying expenditures during 1998-2008.

Financial sector (finance, insurance, real estate) - spent $1.7 billion in federal elections from 1998-2009, and over $3.4 billion on officially registered lobbying

of federal officials in the same period;

Accounting firms - $81m on campaigns; $122m lobbying

Commercial banks - $155m on campaigns; $383m lobbying

Insurance companies - $220m on campaigns; $1.1 billion lobbying

Securities firms - $513m on campaigns; $600m lobbying.

2,996 lobbyists hired / working

(142 previously high-ranking officials in executive branch or Congress)

From: Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America

Report by Essential Information and the Consumer Education Foundation

Executive Summary available - www.washclean.org/Library/Sold-Out-Exec-Sum.pdf

Full report available - www.wallstreetwatch.org/soldoutreport.htm

12 Deregulatory Steps to Financial Meltdown

1. Repeal Glass-Steagall Act (1999)

2. Hide Liabilities: with off-balance sheet accounting

3. Executive branch rejects regulation of financial derivatives

4. Congress blocks regulation of financial derivatives (2000)

5. SEC's voluntary regulation regime for investment banks (1975)

6. Bank self-regulation goes global: Basel I and II rules (1988)

7. Failure to prevent predatory lending (2004-2006)

8. Federal preemption of state consumer protection laws

9. Escaping accountability - immunize assignee liability

10. Fannie and Freddie enter the subprime market

11. Merger mania - abandonment of antitrust and regulation

12. Rampant conflicts of interest: credit ratings firms' failure

From: Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America

Report by Essential Information and the Consumer Education Foundation

Executive Summary available - www.washclean.org/Library/Sold-Out-Exec-Sum.pdf

Full report available - www.wallstreetwatch.org/soldoutreport.htm

How is economic well-being –jobs, health care, housing, –

influenced by lawmaking and the Congress ?

How is lawmaking influenced by accumulated wealth ?

Are economic rules and trends “for sale” ?

Campaign finance, electioneering and lobbying

(on public policy, laws and regulations)L

is intimately related to economic trends !

So ... What are the economic trends ?

Wealth in America - Trends

( net worth reported by top 5% )

1985 - $8 trillion

2010 - $40 trillion

-- quoted by David Stockman,former budget director for Pres. Ronald Reagan

Citigroup - on "Plutonomy"

Excerpts from “Revisiting Plutonomy: The Rich Getting Richer”Citigroup, March 5, 2006

“Asset booms, a rising profit share and favorable treatment by

market-friendly governments have allowed the rich to prosper…

[and] take an increasing share of income and wealth over the last 20

years.”

... the top 10%, particularly the top 1% of the United States – the

plutonomists in our parlance – have benefited disproportionately

from the recent productivity surged in the US… [and] from

globalization and the productivity boom, at the relative expense of

labor.”

[and they] are likely to get even wealthier in the coming years.

Because the dynamics of plutonomy are still intact.”

(quoted by Bill Moyers - speech at Boston University, October 29, 2010)

Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin -loses big on Wall Street gamble

Whitefish Bay, pop. 13,500; School board provides Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB)94% of graduates go to college immediately, less than l% dropout rate)

As example of support for schools --In 2007, the town provides $700,000 in extra donations for student services.

Romanced to invest in "synthetic" CDO's, with other Kenosha districts,

- using $37.3m of their own - and $165m in borrowed funds -- "promised" net return on invested funds of $1.8m/year, for seven years.

Bank took $11.2m in up-front fees; investment sales took $1.2m in commissions

2008 economic crash wiped out the investment.

Now Whitefish Bay is suing to recover – but faces a likely total loss of $200m.($35.6m of the investment was valued at only $925k, as of January 2009)

The town has to make up the loss - including replacing funds borrowed to invest.

How? Cut services -- and raise local taxes.

Economic trends – “natural law” of the universe ?

"... vast inequality is not the result of Adam Smith’s invisible hand; it did not just happen; it was no accident...

It is the result of a long series of policy decisions “about industry and

trade, taxation and military spending, by flesh-and-blood humans

sitting in concrete-and-steel buildings.”

And those policy decisions were paid for by the less than one percent

who participate in our capitalist democracy political contributions.

-- Bill Moyers, quoting Roger D. Hodge "The Mendacity of Hope"

Robert Reich recently summed up the state of working people:

They’ve lost their jobs, their homes, and their savings. Their grown children

have moved back in with them. Their state and local taxes are rising.

Teachers and firefighters are being laid off. The roads and bridges they

count on are crumbling, pipelines are leaking, schools are dilapidated, and

public libraries are being shut.

Why isn’t government working for them?

Because it’s been bought off. It’s as simple as that.

And until we get clean money we’re not going to get clean elections, and

until we get clean elections, you can kiss goodbye to government of, by,

and for the people.

Welcome to the plutocracy. -- Bill Moyers

“the perfect storm that threatens American democracy --

unprecedented concentration of income and wealth at the top;

a record amount of secret money, flooding our democracy; and

a public becoming increasingly angry and cynical about a government that’s raising its taxes, reducing its services, and unable to get it back to work.

We’re losing our democracy to a different system.

It’s called plutocracy.”

-- Robert ReichNew chairman of Common Cause, and former Labor Secretary

We can have concentration of wealth in the hands of a few,

or democracy

-- but not both.

-- Justice Louis D. Brandeis

WHAT can we do ?

What CAN we do ?What can WE do ?What can we DO ?

Democracy is NOT a spectator sport.

Bystanders don't count.

The future belongs to those who TAKE ACTION !

What are we to do?

Disclosure and Transparency

Disclose Act

Voter information

Public financing of campaigns:

Fair Elections Now Act

Abolish "corporate personhood"

MoveToAmend.org, freespeechforpeople.org

Restrict corporate charters ?

Recapture the airwaves ...

Civic awareness and education

What are we to do?


Disclose Act

Voter information








Disclose Act (as originally drafted)Six key components:

Foreign influence would be deterred by banning corporations which have 20% foreign ownership, a foreign-majority board of directors or U.S. operations (or political decision making) under the direction or control of a foreign entity, including a foreign government, would be barred from doing the independent expenditure ads permitted under Citizens United.

Pay-to-Play restrictions by extending the existing ban on government contractors' political contributions to these independent expenditures, and barring TARP recipients from using taxpayer money for political expenditures.

Stand By Your Ad requirements would be extended to require a corporation's CEO to appear on camera to say that he or she "approves this message," just like candidates do now, and for shadow groups/coalitions, the top funder does the disclaimer and the top five contributors have to be listed in the ad.

More disclosure to make clear who's funding these activities, both in filings with the FEC and to corporate shareholders (both within 24h of each such expenditure and compiled quarterly). Also, registered lobbyists would have enhanced disclosure requirements.

Ensuring media access by requiring broadcasters to extend the lowest unit rate to candidates and parties whenever corporations place independent expenditure ads on them, and requiring broadcasters to ensure candidates reasonable access to airtime (so that corporations can't dominate the market).

Extending coordination restrictions to ban coordination between a corporation or union and the candidate on ads referencing a Congressional candidate within 90 days of the primary through the general election, and even before that window for ads which explicitly promote, support, attack or oppose a candidate.

What are we to do?


Disclose Act

Voter information








What are we to do?


Disclose Act

Voter information








FIX the FLAWS / Reform the Laws ...... in the basic documents that shape our democracy.

Tight restrictions on campaign finance and practice ...

Public financing of campaigns ...

Pass the Fair Elections Now Act (FENA) ...

Public funding of campaigns for Congress,

so that elected lawmakers are beholden ONLY to voters,

... not to special-interest campaign financiers.

Enact public campaign financing for state and local races ...

Voter-owned elections ...

elections decided by voters and issues ...

NOT by wealthy financial backers or who can raise the most $$.

Require full transparency and disclosure ...

so we know who is "buying" -- and so that wealth and $$

is not corrupting campaigns and skewing election results.

Fair Elections Now ActS.752 / HR.1826

� Reduce / eliminate (time spent) dialing-for-dollars

� Reduce / eliminate influence by special-interests (corruption, and appearance of corruption)

� Encourage voter contact, attention to issues and solving problems

� Create opportunity for any qualified candidate

So ...

� Provide public campaign funds to any candidate who can qualify

� Encourage many small donors, and in-state support

� No lobbyist contributions allowed

� Reduce media expense

� Funded by small fee on large government contractors

Fair Elections Now Act - How it works

To qualify: Achieve # contributions and $ quota ...

Senate

� Contributors: At least 2,000 + 500 per CD (all in-state, no lobbyists)

� Raise 10% of Fair Elections primary grant

House

� Contributors 1,500 (all in-state, no lobbyists)

� Raise $50K

Qualifying candidates receive:

� $ for primary campaign, then $ for general election

� Additional Fair Elections funds $4 for $1 (max. $100 per donor)Total public funds capped at 3 times grant amount

� Reduction of 20% off lowest broadcast rates

� Media vouchers ($100K per Cong. District)

Fair Elections Now Actas applied to Washington State races

Senate� Contributors: At least 6,500 (all in-state, no lobbyists)

� Raise $115,550 (10% of Fair Elections primary grant)

� Fair Elections grant / Primary: $ 1,155,500 (33% of funds)

� Fair Elections grant / General: $ 2,345,000 (67% of funds)

� $900,000 in media vouchers (can exchange for cash, with national party)

� 20% off from lowest broadcast rates

� 4-for-1 public match for in-state contributions of $100 or less(capped at 3 times public grant amount - $10,500,000 public funds *)

House� Contributors: At least 1,500 (all in-state, no lobbyists)

� Raise $50,000� Fair Elections grant / Primary: $ 360,000 (40% of funds)

� Fair Elections grant / General: $ 540,000 (60% of funds)

� $100,000 in media vouchers (can exchange for cash, with national party)

� 20% off lowest broadcast rates

� 4-for-1 public match for in-state contributions of $100 or less(capped at 3 times public grant amount - $2,700,000 public funds *)

* can still accept private contributions of $100 or less, per year, per in-state resident

What are we to do?


Disclose Act

Voter information









Amend the Constitution ...

to clarify that corporations are not allowed to participate or influence our civil democracy.( i.e. - abolish "corporate personhood" )

Corporations are established by state or federal charter.

Their legal authority and permitted activities may be specified (restricted) by law ...and the charter by which they are established.

Corporate entities are NOT part of flesh-and-blood democratic self-governance ... that is, one person / one vote.

They should NOT have the same political rights as natural persons to speak, spend $$ and participate in civil democratic governance, campaigns, lobbying and voter persuasion.

More info: Move To Amend: movetoamend.org

What are we to do?


Disclose Act

Voter information









Re-assert public ownership and control over our airwaves,

and other means of voter information ...

Including, Net neutrality ...

so that voter-information is not filtered

through corporate-controlled media,

and so that elections are decided by well-informed voters.

Provide robust funding for Voter-Information guides,

Require public debates (as a condition of public campaign financing).

What are we to do?


Disclose Act

Voter information








Creating a broadly-based movement

a.k.a. - Don't mourn; (educate, and) Organize!

� Educate ourselves; educate our neighbors

� Speak up / speak out

� Citizens as a lobbying force

� Support organizations working for change

WHAT can we do ?

Organize local support / action groups

Inform ourselves ... and our friends and community

Raise our voices !

Democracy is NOT a spectator sport !

Connect the dots ...

Every issue we care about is affected by lawmaking-for-sale,

special-interest lobbying, and corporate profiteering.

Connect with values of fairness ...

and a democracy and economy that works for Main Street.

Mobilize for change

Don't mourn: Organize!

The struggle for campaign finance reform

is not new ...

1867 - Naval Appropriations Bill: prohibited solicitation for $$ from Navy yard workers

1883 - Pendleton Act: established civil service

1880's, 1890's - Extortionist tactics, such as "squeeze" bills

1896 - Mark Hanna (RNC): systemized fund-raising from the business community:

1905 - Teddy Roosevelt, to Congress: forbid corporate contributions;

and establish public financing for federal candidates

1907 - Tillman Act: prohibited contributions from corporations and national banks

1910, 1911 - disclosure and spending limits for House and Senate candidates

1925 - Federal Corrupt Practices Act - general contribution limits

1939 - Amendment to Hatch Act - set ceilings for political party and individual contributions.

1943 (Smith-Connally Act) and 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act) extended corporate ban to unions.

1972, 1974 - Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA): Created FEC; set contribution limits

2002 - Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain-Feingold):

new regulations on permitted contributions and "soft money"

2010 - Citizens United ruling (U.S. Supreme Court):

corporate expenditures (for "issue ads") cannot be limited

U.S. Federal Marginal Income Tax Rates

Partial history

top tier rate – over 70% (1936 through 1970)

reaching a high of 91% (from 1951 to 1964)

lowest tier rate ranged from 4% to 14% (1936 to 1970)

over 20%, from 1951 to 1964

Resources and Links:

Center for Public Integrity: www.publicintegrity.org

FollowTheMoney: followthemoney.org

Move To Amend: movetoamend.org

OpenSecrets: opensecrets.org

Sunlight Fndn Blog: http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com

WA Public Campaigns: washclean.org

WA Public Disclosure Commission (PDC): www.pdc.wa.gov

FIX the FLAWS / Reform the Laws ..... in the basic documents that shape our democracy.

Amend the Constitution ...

to clarify that corporations are not allowed to participate or influence our civil democracy.

( i.e. - end "corporate personhood" )

Tight restrictions on campaign finance and practice ...

Public financing of campaigns ...

Full transparency and disclosure ...so that wealth and $$ is not corrupting campaigns and skewing election results.

Public ownership and control over our airwaves,

and other means of voter information ...

Net neutrality ...so that voter-information is not filtered through corporate-control,

and so that elections are decided by well-informed voters.

"Pay-to-play" lawmaking:(in a $$-fueled "representative democracy" )

MESSAGE (from corporate lobbyists):

"You need (our) $$ ...

"If you don't vote our way ...we'll punish you -- take you out

$$ for "issue ads" against you

$$ to support an opponent

Democracy endangered

Oops -- a FLAW:

Lawmaking is FOR SALE

Democracy HIJACKED

.. by $$

.. by special interests (often corporate)

PLUTOCRACY:PLUTOCRACY:PLUTOCRACY:PLUTOCRACY: "Rule by the wealthy..."

"We may have democracy,

or we may have wealth concentrated

in the hands of a few,

but we can't have both."

-- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis

As quoted by Raymond LonerganinMr. Justice Brandeis, Great American (1941), p. 42

How it works:

"Pay-to-play" lawmaking:( in a $$-fueled "representative democracy" )

> $$ funds election campaigns and lobbying

> $$ buys "issue ads" ... to sway voters

> elected winners pass laws ...to benefit the "influence-peddlers"

> corporate winners contribute $$to campaigns and lobbying

> ( campaign financiers "decide" who will be "viable" --in the back room -- with $$ decisions )

"Pay-to-play" lawmaking:

(in a $$-fueled "representative democracy" )

Who benefits ?

Who loses ?

"Squeeze" bills:

legislation threateningto tax or regulate business

unless funds were contributed.

( a technique mastered in late 1800's,to generate special-interest campaign $$ )

Candidates: raised / spent, 2010 (in $ million, to date)

House -------

Party Raised Spent

Dems $ 443 $ 364

Repubs $ 473 $ 366

All $ 922 $ 735

Senate -------

Party Raised Spent

Dems $ 228 $ 171

Repubs $ 237 $ 163

All $ 482 $ 340