American Government: “ Backroom Power Politics “

Backroom Power Politics
By Marek Dutschke         24 March 2012
The American political system is designed so that white, well-to-do landowners call the shots.
Translated By Ron Argentati

Edited by Casey J. Skeens

Germany - Handelsblatt - Original Article (German)
Corruption runs rampant through U.S. state governments. At the federal level, at least insider trading by representatives is now set to be banned. A long overdue step.
The American political system is designed so that white, well-to-do landowners call the shots. George Washington made his fortune through land speculation and by disenfranchising the native population. The same is true of his first electoral victory in 1759, as a representative to the colonial parliament of Virginia (House of Burgesses). Because of his profitable real estate transactions, he was wealthy enough to devote all his time to politics. In order to ensure he got enough votes, Washington would treat eligible voters to a proper night on the town before he deposited them, still drunk, at the polling place. In a way, that fusion of politics and business interests survives even to this day.
A study by the Center for Public Integrity released last Monday had little good to say about state politics in America. Most state governments are rife with corruption: budgetary decisions are hidden from public view, rules are not enforced, money from lobbyists goes unreported and the influence of private business is given a prominent place in governmental matters.
Between 2007 and 2008 in the state of Georgia, more than 600 gifts were given to government officials by businesses seeking to do business with the state. Despite the fact that such bribery is strictly against existing laws, no one was punished for giving or accepting the gifts. In Maine, a state senator simply “forgot” to mention that in addition to his government job he was also CEO of a corporation that had been given $98 million in contracts by the state.
In North Carolina, a member of the state legislature introduced a law that would make it easier to put up gigantic advertising billboards. It was soon discovered that the member happened to also own a billboard company. Despite the matter being investigated by an ethics commission, no hint of any conflict of interest was uncovered since competing billboard companies would also be given the opportunity to bid on those contracts as well. Representatives in Montana are regularly treated to dinner by lobbyists and are exempt from reporting such largesse as long as the restaurant tab stays below $2,400. The list of offenses goes on and on.
In the Hands of Corrupt Officials
Despite the fact that the existence of this swamp of corruption is widely known, Mitt Romney nevertheless wants to take control of social assistance programs away from the federal government and give it to the individual states. The most vulnerable in society are to be dependent on corrupt state officials in order to get their help. As a concession to remedy this miserable state of affairs, federal officials are now promoting improvements.
On Thursday, the Senate decided to forbid insider trading for its members. That law goes into effect after Obama has signed it, something he has not yet done. So right now, it's still completely legal for members of Congress to buy and sell investments while they have access to inside information. For example, a senator serving on the Senate Intelligence Committee might see a confidential memo concerning a planned terrorist attack on a particular airline. A quick telephone call to his broker would enable him to dump his shares in that airline.
The rationale for the business-as-usual procedure up to now is a complete mystery and the new law is sorely needed. It appears, however, that the new law didn't arise out of political conviction but rather because of electoral considerations: Congressional approval ratings have sunk to an all-time low of 10 percent, and politicians hope to lift that figure up before November.
The question now is whether these latest political developments in America are merely a continuation of George Washington's practice of paying for the pre-election booze parties or whether they're making him roll over in his grave.

Technorati Tags: U.S. Government,Republicans,Democrats,State Government,Corruption,Politics,Current Events

American Dream? Not Anymore

   Let us venture down south and into Mexico for a quick look at what some of the citizen's of the country think about the American election season.

Watching America   :   » American Dream No More

American Dream No More

By Emilio Zebadua

Why bother replacing Obama when he has done everything in his power to maintain the political status quo, which at the moment assures attractive bonds and rates of return on Wall Street, even though the rest of the country hasn’t yet emerged from the economic recession? It’s no wonder the elections aren’t generating much enthusiasm.

Translated By Lisa Steward

21 March 2012

Edited by Gillian Palmer

Mexico - El Universalmas - Original Article (Spanish)


Yesterday in the state of Illinois, near the middle of the U.S., they voted to elect the GOP candidate to the White House. But in reality the presidential race was resolved months ago, outside the electoral process. The November election will be won by the incumbent President Barack Obama, without a Democratic challenger and most likely against the indefinable Republican candidate, Mitt Romney.



Until now the electoral process has centered around the Republican Party’s internal contest. The frontrunner has always been Romney, a multimillionaire entrepreneur with links to corporate banking, mergers and acquisitions. During his time as governor of Massachusetts, he ruled alongside and on behalf of the business sector; as it happens, he occupies a moderate position in the U.S. political spectrum. And for Romney, this fact is precisely the problem. The “center” which he represents is too far to the left of the highly organized neoconservative Republican Party base, one made up of victims of the mortgage crisis, people behind in their payments, those without access to medical care, members of evangelical church support groups, workers with reduced or flat salaries and considerable unemployment risks or small business owners in danger of bankruptcy.



The conservative base is collectively sponsored by special interest industries such as arms manufacturers, retail and consumer sectors, insurance companies as well as what is left of the protectionist factions (with the exception of the automotive industry and including independent oil companies), among others.



For these right-wing entrepreneurs, Romney’s link to Wall Street puts a damper on his aspirations. That’s why they have sought out a candidate to the right of him — anyone will do, really: from Sarah Palin, charismatic enough to carry the most radical camp but deemed unable to deliver by her financial backers, to Rick Perry, who as Texas governor possessed the natural base from which to garner support from inside the Republican establishment. Since the George W. Bush presidency, diverse business interests have put forth candidates (Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Michelle Bachmann), all of whom have generated a scant amount of supporters and votes and certainly not enough to lessen the flow of funds from the financial wing of the GOP, who all the while have never stopped backing Romney.



The latest challenger to emerge from the most reactionary of the radical right wing has been Rick Santorum, who began to weave his web of support among the religious right, an interest group that has been actively funding candidates for the past decade. He was even prepared to lose his 2006 reelection as senator of Pennsylvania in exchange for the backing of these groups. In depressed economies like those in states like Illinois, parts of the middle class, small businesses and impoverished workers have cast their votes for Santorum in order to prevent the banks from dominating the entire Republican Party. These groups don’t have the money to win, but they can prevent Romney’s victory from being a landslide.



The nomination is not at stake, just Romney’s popularity. That’s why he doesn’t pose a definitive threat to the White House. He lacks the support from the extreme right — although he doesn’t actually need it as long as he consolidates the center or those to the right of the national spectrum, where his approval has been partial or insufficient at best. Obama is solidly entrenched in the center, yet he has not stopped inching to the right since he began his presidency.



Romney intends to replace Obama without changing the current government’s policies. This is what will assure his defeat, rendering him not only unattractive, but too costly, for the coalition of business interests, bankers and industrialists who support the present fiscal policy, the withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan and the remainder of the bank bailouts. Why bother replacing Obama when he has done everything in his power to maintain the political status quo, which at the moment assures attractive bonds and rates of return on Wall Street, even though the rest of the country hasn’t yet emerged from the economic recession? It’s no wonder the elections aren’t generating much enthusiasm.



The author has a doctorate in law.

CLICK HERE FOR
ORIGINAL VERSION