American Democracy No Longer Works.
Washington politicians don't give a damn about you or me. They only answer to billionaires and giant corporations. Thanks to forty years of Supreme Court decisions, American politics is no longer about the "will of We The People" - it's only about the money. As a result, we longer have a functioning democracy in America. Years of corporate-friendly Supreme Court decisions, like the decision in Citizen’s United, have rigged and corrupted American politics so badly that average hard-working Americans have little to no influence in Washington.
Instead, our “elected officials” are only answering to the wishes of the wealthy elite and private interest groups. A study published in Perspectives on Politics by Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University finds that when the wealthy elite or powerful interest groups want a policy passed or not passed, Washington listens. But, when We The People speak up and sound out about a particular policy or piece of legislation, Americans are right to be cynical.
In his dissent in Citizens United, Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens pointed out that the Court's decision would lead to fewer and fewer people even bothering to show up to vote. He said from the bench: "When citizens turn on their televisions and radios before an election and hear only corporate electioneering, they may lose faith in their capacity, as citizens, to influence public policy. A Government captured by corporate interests, they may come to believe, will be neither responsive to their needs nor willing to give their views a fair hearing. The predictable result is cynicism and disenchantment: an increased perception that large spenders call the tune and a reduced willingness of voters to take part in democratic governance."
He added that unlimited corporate and fat-cat money would also scare the hell out of politicians themselves, so they'd do what the rich guys want and to hell with the average voter: "To the extent that corporations are allowed to exert undue influence in electoral races, the speech of the eventual winners of those races may also be chilled. Politicians who fear that a certain corporation can make or break their reelection chances may be cowed into silence about that corporation."
And, four years later, we find that Stevens was totally right. In their study, Gilens and Page write that, “Ordinary citizens…have little or no independent influence on policy at all.” They go on to say that the wealthy elite have, “a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy…more so than any other set of actors,” while powerful interest groups do pretty well too, with, “a large, positive, highly significant impact on public policy.”
Gilens and Page looked at a data set of over 1,700 policy issues over a twenty year period, and compared that data to public opinion surveys taken during the same time, that were broken down by income and support from interest groups. In a functioning democracy, free from corruption and the money of private interest groups, you’d expect that as more and more average citizens approved of a policy or piece of legislation, lawmakers would be more and more likely to adopt that policy or piece of legislation.
But that’s not the case any more here in America. Instead, according to Gilens and Page, as more and more average American citizens support a policy or piece of legislation, the probability of it being adopted by lawmakers in Washington stays the same. It doesn’t matter if 10% of Americans support it, or 90% of Americans support it. But the same can’t be said for the interests of the wealthy elite.
That’s because, as more and more members of the wealthy elite support a policy or piece of legislation, the likelihood that lawmakers in Washington adopt that policy or piece of legislation increases steadily. And the same is true with well-funded special interest groups. The more special interest groups support a policy or piece of legislation, the greater the likelihood that lawmakers will adopt it.
You also see similar results when you break up Americans by income groups. When more and more Americans in the richest top-tenth percentile supported a particular policy or piece of legislation, the likelihood that it would be adopted by lawmakers stayed relatively the same. But, as more and more Americans in the 90th income percentile or the even richer wealthy elite supported a policy or piece of legislation, the likelihood that it would be adopted by lawmakers increased dramatically.
When it comes to working class Americans, it doesn't matter if they're in the 50th income percentile or all the way up to the 90th income percentile: they're ignored by our politicians for the preferences of the top tenth. The bottom-line here is that the elites are getting what they want, while the rest of us aren’t, because money has taken over our political process.
For the first time in American history, a majority of lawmakers in the House of Representatives are millionaires, and a startling number - at both the federal and state level - are being bankrolled by billionaires like the Koch Brothers. This isn’t what the Founders had in mind when they founded our once-great nation. Thomas Jefferson once said that, “Those seeking profits, were they given total freedom, would not be the ones to trust to keep government pure and our rights secure. Indeed, it has always been those seeking wealth who were the source of corruption in government…”
The only other time in American history when the influences of money and corruption were as rampant as they are today was during the Gilded Age of the late 19th century, and that period of corruption directly led to the crash of 1896, the worst crash we have ever seen. That crash brought on a massive populist revolt, which led to things like the direct election of Senators, ballot initiatives in the states, and women gaining the right to vote.
If the current levels of corruption and greed in Washington remain unchecked, it’s almost certain that we’ll have another great crash, maybe as soon as 2016. When that crash happens, let’s get ready to react to it with another progressive populist revolt, and, like with the last progressive populist era, let's amend the Constitution, this time to say that money is not speech, and corporations aren’t people. Only then will the majority of Americans re-gain our democracy and political process, and make America great again.
Comments


Well, chuckle8, I guess you are going to have to search the blogs because I have never, ever said that I have stayed home and not voted. I have always voted. I just didn't vote for Obama the last time. I voted for Jill Stein of the Green Party. The time before that, I voted for Obama. This next time I will probably vote for someone other than Democrat unless they have really suitable candidates. And will definitely not vote for Republicans. I will likely vote mostly Green and Democrats. What I was trying to say in all of those other posts was that it is pretty much an exercise in futility when the people you vote for turn out to be more like the people you really didn't want to win in the first place. But I'll keep voting just for shits and giggles but I really don't believe anything useful will come of it.

Palin- Oh, so you DID vote! I eat my words and extend my humblest apology. - AIW

Thank you Aliceinwonderland! I voted, and all I got was this darn jury duty! And speaking of jury duty...I have learned from a friend who has made the mistake of using different variations of her name on her drivers license and on her voter's registration that now she is getting summons for jury duty under both names. Get lucky to get out of one jury duty and you get yet another summons under the other name a month later. ☮

Interesting how you would mention jury duty, Palin, 'cuz I served on a grand jury a couple months ago. When first summoned, I was kinda grudging about it, but it was an interesting enough experience that I soon forgot my initial misgivings. - AIW

Here come de judge! ;-} ⚖

I remember kinda hoping for a case that was challenging in some way, or controversial. But they all were ordinary kinds of things like DUIs, theift and drug possession (meth or heroin; not marijuana! Aww shucks...) Pretty cut-and dry. There were also a couple of domestic violence cases that were pretty sad. We even indicted suspects in one murder case involving some poor drunk dude who got beaten to death in a "friend's" apartment, over an unpaid taxi fare. Wow.
Just riff-raff doin' what riff-raff does; disgusting, stupid shit. - AIW
Palin -- Sorry, now that you have said it, I remember it being the way you say it. In any case, I gave you the long list of differences that says voting for democrats is not an exercise in futility. However, history seems to have shown that voting for a third party at the national level is an exercise in futility. The two examples that always come to my mind are Teddy Roosevelt and Ross Perot.

Chuck points out: "...history seems to have shown that voting for a third party at the national level is an exercise in futiliy. The two examples that always come to my mind are Teddy Roosevelt and Ross Perot."
This is exactly why I've felt cornered into voting the "lesser evil" again and again, rather than the candidates I prefer. Either way, I (and like-minded souls) are screwed. So the choice comes down to whether you'd rather get screwed this-a-way or that-a-way... if you wanna call it a "choice"... - Aliceinwonderland
AIW -- For the 13 weeks the dems had the power do you know anything they did that would have not been better with more dems? IMO, in that 13 weeks they did things that made me proud that I voted for them.

Chuckle8 ~ What does it matter how the Democrats vote when the entire process is an exercise of futility? What I've seen is Democrats pushing sincere legislation that hasn't got a snowballs chance in hell of passing. Then, when a "filibuster" or lopsided vote occurs they say they tried. Awwww, how precious? What they really did is shill. Because if they really wanted to try they would never have given up so easily. Chuckle8, don't be a part of the problem. Admit the obvious. That is the only way we are ever going to move on out of the hole of muck we have dug ourselves into.
DAM -- 390 filibusters and you say they are shills. When they were in control for the 13 weeks they passed a lot of good bills. What do you envision they would do without the power? It is almost like you do not understand how our form of government works and how the billions of dollars of the 1% influence the media. Pass card check by voting democratic.

From now on, vote for the political critter that receives the least amount of campaign cash from the ruling elite. How much did Obama get? A lot more than everyone else. We should have picked up on this as a big clue as to how he would conduct his office.
If everyone of the 99% of voters did this, we wouldn't have ruling elite owned scum running this country. Vote your conviction...don't give in to the ruling elite scam of voting for the least frightening politician selected from the one party system...the DemoPublicans aka Republicrats. Those who promised they'd represent the people that voted for them..yet represented the wealthy more.... deserve to lose...no matter what the consequences. If everyone voted their conviction instead of being cowed by the crooked system we wouldn't have to worry about being screwed by them.
Socialist Kshama Sawant, Seattle City council member, is a good example! Want to change the crooked system...maybe we need Socialist Kshama Sawant for President...along with putting non-Democrats and non-Republicans into Congress.
The good old boy network of crooked politicians, and their ruling elite bosses, worry that the tables will be turned on them. That's why they have to keep people frightened and confused and voting for one of their own.
Nothing will change until we show the ruling elite that we're all going to turn this country into a hard line Socialist country. The communist scare turned this country around once..let's do it again!!!
Romney recieved twice as much as Obama (Time magazine in 2012).

That is very believable, Chuck. But I still think Palin makes a great point; one that has occurred to me as well. Whoever pays into any candidate's campaign should give more than a clue how that candidate would legislate, once in office. - AIW
AIW, Palin -- I certainly agree. The Northwestern study pretty much says whoever pays the politician is the way he votes. My point is with that environment how can I make my vote count the most.

Chuck, I wish I had an answer to that question. The only thing that occurs to me is that if enough of us begin avoiding candidates funded by Big Bizness, we might be able to get more of the representation we need and deserve. - AIW
charlesbb -- Have you seen the exact use of democracy in the last 300 years in any country anywhere?
AIW -- My answer, of course, is to vote democratic (while holding your nose if necesary). One driving factor is the one vote short on card check.



chuckle8 ~ National Debt good... I get that theory. In the short run it is absolutely true. Our deficit floats our boat. However, if you consult any reputable economist--and I am referring to Dr. Ravi Batra in this case--this is only a temporary solution to a far bigger problem--lack of manufacturing. You are simply sticking your finger in the dike. If you intend to produce, eventually, running a deficit and debt might work. However, if you want to sustain this approach indefinitely you are only postponing an inevitable catastrophe. You simply cannot have your cake and eat it too; and, you cannot make something out of nothing. In time, the floated boat will sink just like the Titanic did.