Are elections for sale? PDF
Preview Are elections for sale?
ARE ELECTIONS FOR SALE? ‘‘NewDemocracyForumoperatesatalevelofliteracyand responsibilitywhichisalltoorareinourtime.’’ —JohnKennethGalbraith OtherbooksintheNewDemocracyForumseries: TheNewInequality:CreatingSolutionsforPoorAmerica, byRichardB.Freeman ACommunityofEquals:TheConstitutionalProtectionofNew Americans,byOwenFiss MetroFutures:EconomicSolutionsforCitiesandTheirSuburbs, byDanielD.LuriaandJoelRogers UrgentTimes:PolicingandRightsinInner-CityCommunities byTraceyL.MearesandDanM.Kahan WillStandardsSavePublicEducation?byDeborahMeier DoAmericansShopTooMuch?byJulietSchor BeyondBackyardEnvironmentalism,byCharlesSabel,Archon Fung,andBradleyKarkkainen IsInequalityBadforOurHealth?byNormanDaniels,Bruce Kennedy,andIchiroKawachi What’sWrongwithaFreeLunch?byPhilippeVanParijs WhoseVoteCounts?byRobertRichieandStevenHill ARE ELECTIONS FOR SALE? DAVID DONNELLY, JANICE FINE, AND ELLEN S. MILLER EDITED BY JOSHUA COHEN AND JOEL ROGERS FOR BOSTONREVIEW BEACON PRESS BOSTON BEACONPRESS BeaconStreet Boston,Massachusetts- www.beacon.org BeaconPressbooks arepublishedundertheauspicesof theUnitarianUniversalistAssociationofCongregations. (cid:1),byJoshuaCohenandJoelRogers OriginallypublishedasMoneyandPolitics:FinancingOurElectionsDemocratically all rights reserved PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica Thisbookisprintedonacid-freepaperthatmeetstheuncoatedpaper ansi/nisospecificationsforpermanenceasrevisedin. CompositionbyWilsted&TaylorPublishingServices LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData Donnelly,David. [Moneyandpolitics] Areelectionsforsale?/DavidDonnelly,JaniceFine,andEllenS.Miller; editedbyJoshuaCohenandJoelRogersforBostonreview. p. cm.—(Newdemocracyforum) Originallypublishedas:Moneyandpolitics:financingourelections democratically.c. Includesbibliographicreferences. isbn---(pbk.) .Campaignfunds—UnitedStates. I.Fine,Janice(JaniceRuth) II.Miller,EllenS. III.Cohen,Joshua,– . IV.Rogers,Joel,– . V.Title. VI.Series. jk1991.d672001 .(cid:1)(cid:1)—dc CONTENTS ForewordbyGoreVidal / vii PrefacebyDavidDonnelly andJaniceFine / xiii 1 daviddonnelly,janicefine, andellens.miller GoingPublic / 2 senatorrussellfeingold ModestReform? / zachpolett EmpowerCitizens / douglasphelps SettingLimits / e.joshuarosenkranz CleanandConstitutional / steverosenthalandamandafuchs Labor’sRole / bruceackerman ThePatriotOption / thomase.mann APleaforRealism / danielh.lowenstein ARoleforParties / 3 daviddonnelly,janicefine, andellens.miller Reply / Notes / AbouttheContributors / FOREWORD gore vidal On a recent cross-country tour of the U.S., I chatted aboutpoliticswithallsortsofaudiences—sometimesin theflesh,morerarelyfromthetube,whereIoncereigned butnow,asourrulersgrowedgy,amrelegatedtotheca- blemargins(alongwithsuchfellownay-sayersasNoam Chomsky).IntheseconversationsIfoundagain,despite ever greater media censorship of radical ideas, that my audiences were quite alert to the perfect corruption of ffi our public life. They know that political o ces are boughtbythosewhocanpayanddeniedtoalltherest, thatpoliticiansarebetteridentifiedwiththeircorporate ancestrythanvotingbase(thelateSenatorHenryJack- son,forexample,beingmoreaccuratelydescribedasthe senatorfromBoeingthanWashingtonstate).But,given this, I was often asked: ‘‘Why is nothing done?’’ ‘‘Why is there so little outrage?’’ ‘‘Why is there no party of Reform?’’ Whyindeed?Writingin ,DavidHumeobserved, ‘‘Nothingappearsmoresurprisingtothosewhoconsider ff humana airswithaphilosophicaleyethantheeasiness with which the many are governed by the few, and the { vii } GORE VIDAL implicit submission with which men resign their own sentimentsandpassionstothoseoftherulers.Whenwe ff inquirebywhatmeansthiswonderise ected,weshall find out that, as Force is always on the side of the gov- erned, thegovernors havenothing to supportthem but opinion. It is, therefore, on opinion only that govern- ment is founded, and the maxim extends to the most despotic and most military governments as well as the mostfreeandpopular.’’ To deny inconvenient opinions a hearing is one way the few have of controlling the many. But as Richard Nixon used to say, ‘‘That would be the easy way.’’ The slyerwayistobombardthepublicwithmisinformation. During more than half a century of corruption by the printed word in the form of ‘‘news’’—propaganda dis- guisedasfact—Ihaveyettoreadastoryfavorabletoan- othersociety’ssocialandpoliticalarrangements.Swedes havefreehealthcare,betterschoolsthanours,childday- carecentersforworkingmothers...buttheSwedesare all drunks who commit suicide (even blonde blue-eyed people must pay for such decadent amenities). Lesson? Nonationalhealthcare,noeducation,etc.,because—as WilliamBennettwilltellyouassoonasaTVredlight switches on—social democracy, much less socialism, is just plain morally evil. Far better to achieve the good thingsinlifehonestly,byinheritingmoneyorwinninga lottery.TheAmericanway. ThefactthattheUnitedStateswasneverintendedto { viii } FOREWORD beademocracyissowellknownthatitisnowcompletely forgotten.(Hencethefamiliar,grindingincantationof ouropinionmakers:‘‘Wearethegreatestdemocracyon earth, with the widest range of detergents, etc.’’) The mostcandidoftheFoundingFathers,JohnJay,puttheir opinion on the matter in an artless but truthful way: ‘‘The people who own the country ought to run it.’’ James Madison, a preacher’s son, poured unction over this when he acknowledged demurely and approvingly theironlawof oligarchythatinvariablycomestogovern parliaments, congresses, and nations. The few will al- ways control the many through manufactured opinion, which bedazzles and confuses the many when it is not just plain dumbing them down into the dust of what SpiroAgnewcalled‘‘thegreatestnationinthecountry.’’ Nevertheless,atrulypopular opinionisbeginningto coalesceintheperpetualshadowofmanufacturedopin- ffi ion:oursystemof electingpoliticianstoo ceisrotten andcorruptedtoitscore,becauseorganizedmoneyhas longsincereplacedorganizedpeopleastheauthorofour politics.Andmostof itcomesfromrichpeopleandcor- porations, who now own our political process—lock, stock,andporkbarrel. Somenutsandbolts.Of thebillionsnowspenteach election cycle, most is donated in checks exceeding , .Butlessthanone-tenthof percentof thegen- eral population make individual contributions at this rate.Andamonggroupcontributors,betterthan per- { ix } GORE VIDAL cent comes from corporations, which duly record their political investment as a tax-deductible ‘‘cost of doing business.’’ These happy few are prepared to pay a high andrisingpricefortheprivilegeof controllingourgov- ernment.Inthe electioncycle,theaveragewinning House candidate cost the owners about , , the averagewinningSenatecandidateabitover million. Multiplybothfiguresbytwoifyouwantthecostofdis- ffi lodging an incumbent from o ce—in a system where, last time around, over percent were reelected. To fi- nancearaceinbigmediamarketslikeNewYorkorCali- fornia,it’sabitmoreexpensive:asof electionday , somethinglike millionand millionrespectively. Andif theytireof buyingothers,of course,therich ffi canbuypoliticalo cesforthemselves.InitstrulyCali- gulaesqueBuckleyv.Valeodecision,ourSupremeCourt, evereagertoextendtheireccentricnotionofdemocracy, ruledthattherichhaveeveryrighttospendasmuchof ffi their own money as they like to buy an o ce. Hence, a demi-billionaire like Herb Kohl could campaign as ‘‘Nobody’sSenatorbutYours!’’,meaningnot‘‘yours’’but ‘‘mine,’’andwin. Dothemanyreallyholdtheopinionsof thefewwho ownthepoliticalprocess?Itwouldseemnot,sinceonly half theeligiblevoterscanbringthemselvestovoteina ff presidentialelection,whileonlyathirdvoteino -year congressionalelections. OndarkdaysIinclinetowhatHenryAdamswroteat { x }
The list of books you might like
