By MARTY GOODMAN
“Anybody who
wants to be an ambassador must at least give $250,000.” — Richard Nixon’s
price check to his Chief of Staff on campaign donations.
This year’s U.S.
presidential campaign fundraising is expected to double the record-breaking $1
billion presidential campaign haul of 2008. Everything has its price under
capitalism, including democracy.
The campaign is
unfolding under the shadow of the game-changing 2010 Supreme Court decision in
“Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission,” which upheld the “free
speech” rights of unlimited, secret corporate campaign donations.
The result has been
virtually unrestricted campaign funding of political campaign organizations
known as Political Action Committees (PACs), now re-configured as “super-PACs.”
Seldom invoking the moral depravity of the Watergate crimes, when the Nixon
administration used secret campaign funds to finance the Watergate break-in on
Democratic headquarters, the corporate media ignores the mass outrage that led
to so-called Congressional “campaign reform,” now largely overturned, along
with a century of previous reforms (see Mother Jones, July/August,
2012)
For the last three
summer vacations, Barack Obama and family stayed on Martha’s Vineyard, near
Cape Cod, Mass., a prime vacation destination for the 1% elite. But not this
year! Obama says he is with “Main Street,” the 99%. Yeah, sure. But neither will Mitt
Romney likely be at his New Hampshire vacation estate much, after being stung
with revelations that his Bain Capital associates slashed jobs for maximum
profit.
Republican millionaire
Mitt Romney and the Obama camp have organized exclusive dinner fundraisers; the
most extravagant have taken place in New York and Hollywood, where dinner can
set you back $40,000—more than most people see in their entire lifetime.
The New York
Times wrote that for Romney, there is “a natural bond between him
and his top dollar supporters.” Romney’s campaign received $229,000 from his former company,
Bain Capital, a brutal job-cutting, slash-and-burn investment firm. Bain’s
donations went to both parties, though mostly to Romney, but have declined.
Nevertheless, since the 2008 election cycle the Democrats have received $1.3
million from Bain, double what Republicans received. Bill Clinton defended Bain
against Obama’s hypocritical criticism.
Barack claims 98% of
his donations are $250 or less; Mitt says 93% of his donations are small. But
both have their billionaires and multi-millionaires. At one $40,000-a-plate
dinner for New York celebs, Obama said, “You’re the tie-breaker. You’re the
ultimate arbitrator of which direction this country goes.”
In fact, in 2008, the
Obama camp raised a record $730 million, and clobbered his opponent John
McCain, who raised a mere $333 million. Obama, in one of his first betrayals,
rejected public campaign funding. Barack Obama was the preferred candidate of Wall Street in
the last election, at $15.8 million its fourth largest contributor. The crooks
at Goldman Sachs, recipients of billions in bailout funds, were Barack’s best
paying Wall Street pals!
The Wall Street
criminals are in a panic over sagging economic prospects (their own, of
course!) and the simmering anger of working people against bank bailouts and
rip-offs. Wall Street looks nervously at mass movements in Egypt that kicked
out a U.S.-backed puppet, mass strikes erupting across southern Europe, mass
protests against attacks on union rights in Wisconsin, and Occupy Wall Street,
etc.
This year, many in the
Bankster class chose to switch horses due to “reforms” under Obama that barely
scratch the surface of corporate theft, like the 2010 Obama-backed regulatory
Dodd-Frank bill, and Obama’s proposal for a minor tax on those making over
$250,000. (If elected, we can expect Obama to capitulate to the Tea Party on
those issues anyway!)
In 2012, however,
according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), Romney is the current
favorite of Wall Street crooks, who forked over $34 million to their man of the
hour.
However, the July 3 Wall Street Journal observes that “the
securities and investment industry has remained a top Obama donor. Together,
Obama and the Democratic National Committee have raised more than $14.4 million
from the industry toward the 2012 election cycle, according to the most recent
data available from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. [It]
contributed about $3.5 million to the Obama campaign, making it the
sixth-ranking sector supporting the president’s re-election. The Democratic
National Committee has received almost $11 million from the industry through
June, the center reports, the third-highest industry donor.”
Swept under the rug in
this dance between competing wings of the 1% are attacks on the right to
organize unions, dwindling family resources, the deportations of immigrants,
attacks on civil liberties, police brutality, and unemployment that hovers
above 8%. Real unemploy- ment is actually far higher and at depression levels
for African American and Hispanic youth.
An astounding new
study by a Congressional non-partisan research service reveals that the share
of the nation’s wealth held by the less affluent half of American households
dropped precipitously after the financial crisis, to 1.1 percent. The share of
total net worth held by the wealthiest 1 percent was 34.5 percent in 2010. The
top 10 percent’s share was 74.5 percent.
Working people have no
stake in either candidate. The unspoken goal of the 1% in this election, or any
other election, is to elect someone who can divert the anger of working people
into safe channels that do not threaten the obscene wealth of those who own the
election process, the workplace, and basically the entire country.
Socialists say: End
the wars now! Trillions for jobs, not banks! Full employment at union wages!
Cancel the student debt! Nationalize the banks, auto industry, and energy
industry—to be run democratically by the workers! Working people need our own
fighting labor party.
No comments:
Post a Comment