« Lopsided Medicare Billing Patterns | Main | Supporting Our Country »
September 22, 2007
Money & Campaigning Under the Legal Radar
An ugly tale of American politics by Tina Grazier
The continuing talk of ill-gotten gains in politics is enough to make most people turn away in disgust. I’m no exception. If I could, I’d wave a magic wand and smile with glee as the guilty got exactly what they deserve, measure for measure, and the innocent would be left alone to continue in their work. Magic wands don’t exist however, so it seems the long FBI investigations, court delays, lying, compromising, dirty tricks and deals will continue into the foreseeable future. As headlines rage and negative feelings abound I’d like to know one thing, why don't campaign laws protect against the following:
AFL-CIO to spend $200 million on 2008 Associated Press, by Staff
WASHINGTON— The AFL-CIO and its unions said Friday they will spend an estimated $200 million on the 2008 elections, with the nation's largest labor federation devoting $53 million exclusively to grass-roots mobilization. In addition, the AFL-CIO said it would deploy more than 200,000 volunteers leading up to the election, with special focus on battleground states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin.
Unfortunately I was unable to access the story, so I don’t have any more information on this, but the fact remains the money will be spent with zero hoopla made over it…zero hand wringing about BIG UNETHICAL UNION and also without lengthy investigations and indictments. Union money will get great headlines; headlines that almost BRAG about the HUGE sums being spent and "free" work done by “volunteers.”
The next example is a more dangerous one:
George Soros: The Man, The Mind And The Money Behind MoveOn, by INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Through networks of nongovernmental organizations, Soros intends to ruin the presidency of George W. Bush "by any legal means necessary" and knock America off its global pedestal. "His view of America is so negative," says Sen. Joe Lieberman, who, like Gen. David Petraeus, has been a target of Soros' electoral "philanthropy." "The places he's put his money are . . . so destructive that it unsettles me." Soros' aim seems to be to make the U.S. just another client state easily controlled by the United Nations and other one-world groups where he has lots of friends. *** Best known among these groups is MoveOn.org, a previously small fringe-left group to which Soros has given $5 million since 2004. Bulked up by cash, the group now uses professional public relations tactics to undercut the Iraq War effort, with its latest a full-page New York Times ad that branded Gen. Petraeus "General Betray Us."
Soros' efforts go beyond spin. He has also bankrolled groups involved in the manipulation of elections, an activity that has increased since his money came into the picture. (three such organizations have been fined or sanctioned) *** Soros says he has ended funding to voter-drive organizations, but he still heads a secretive rich-man's club called "Democracy Alliance" that has doled out $20 million to activist groups like ACORN. *** It's also noteworthy that the Soros-funded MoveOn.org advocates "paper-trail" electronic voting in the U.S., the same kind used in Venezuela, where allegations of electronic fraud and ballot secrecy violations have ended confidence in the system and sealed Chavez's dictatorship.
We are in a political war like never before and the future of our nation is at stake. The next president and congress will be in a position to decide the direction of the war on terror, future Supreme Court appointments, and perhaps most importantly, whether our nation will remain a democratic republic or become more socialist and controlling. It is incumbent upon all of us to notice the political games playing out in the news as well as the words being spoken by candidates.
Republicans are vulnerable in one significant area. The base is adamant…break the rules and you are out. The opposition doesn’t have this problem to any great degree. But they know this Achilles heal exists for republicans and they will do anything to make big headlines involving republicans accused of wrongdoing. We can expect investigations, outrageous allegations, and cases being delayed and dragged out in court. One of the groups Soros funds is the ACLU, a group with a strong liberal/socialist bent. Lawyers in general make up a big democrat lobby…oh, perhaps you didn’t think of them as a lobby? Phfff! Not only do they lobby...they write the laws, loop holes and all.
Soros cash flows liberally under the legal radar:
Soros' Open Society Institute gave $20,000 for the legal defense of radical attorney Lynne Stewart. She was convicted in 2002 of abetting jailed terrorists after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
It's probably no coincidence that Soros was a big backer of campaign finance reforms that have allowed nominally nonpartisan groups like MoveOn.org to strike with the kinds of tactics they are using.
Does all of this mean I think that “guilty” republicans should be given a pass or for that matter, your vote? Absolutely not! What I am asking is that we develop two things: 1. an enhanced ability to evaluate and parse the news, and 2. a healthy dose of good old American skepticism. It doesn’t hurt to ‘hold fire” until we can “see the whites of their eyes” either. We must time our battles carefully or risk losing the bigger war.
Innocent until proven guilty plays an important part in our judicial system. Since the press holds court every day with sensationalized headlines and 24-7 “Breaking News” it’s even more important to be mindful of that important aspect of the law and to make an effort to find the complete story on our own. It also doesn’t hurt to ask, even rhetorically, what is it about our campaign laws that allow some money to be celebrated and other money to be deemed “unethical”?
Find the full IBD story on Soros here:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275181103776079
Posted by Post Scripts at September 22, 2007 12:06 AM
Comments
Tina (and our readers) if we are going to successfully protect our democracy from "undue influence" by big money used in calculated and deliberate ways to subvert the system, we will have to expose what is happening, point ouit the bad laws, the extortion, the bribery and influence peddling in no uncertain terms. And then we have to find enough honest officials that will act to impose limits on this corruption. (I say that as one who hates to imposing limits on anything, but in this case it is long overdue. )
This "undue influence" is to my understanding the ONLY exception to the rule of law that says money used in an election or a political campaign of any sort, equals free speech.
There are many limits placed on money despite that ruling of free speech. So, it is not only highly possible, it is fundamental and necessary to protecting and preserving our clean elections!
We have to keep our elections out of the control of evil people and radicals, like those behind DailyKOS, MoveOn, ANSWER, etc.
We must stop the hate and corruption coming from only a few wealthy people trying to buy our votes as they infect America with hate and undermine our democracy.
Lobbyists are no exception, they have done just as much damage as they have good.
In fact, I think we are better off without the likes of Jack Abramoff and his ilk. Abramoff got too greedy and got caught, but you just have to know there are many more like him out there doing illegal things too! That's just a given knowing how much is at risk everytime there is a vote in Congress! And then consider how money is used to buy votes and how many opportunities there are in Washigton to abuse power/money by unethical people on all sides.
Posted by: Jack Lee at September 22, 2007 01:54 PM
Write a law and within that law there are always going to be ways around it. Those who need funds will look to see what they can do "legally" to acquire funds...and what they can't. Sometimes they knowingly cross the line. But, more often the laws are difficult to decipher. Knowing where exactly to draw the line is not always clear. Complex law is the culprit. I've read enough tax law to know just how easy it is to make mistakes in interpretation. (When the IRS people can't even agree you know something really dumb has been written into the law.)
At least one of the things Delay was investigated for was not illegal when he did it...it became illegal only later. Yet he still had to spend time and money defending himself in court. If he was supposed to "know the law" then surely those who filed the complaint against him should also have to know, and be held accountable for, the law. If not the complaint is nothing more than "legalized" harrassment.
I still say we would all be better off if the limits were removed (freedom) and full immediate disclosure was mandatory...post on the internet all contributions...by whom and the amount given. Then we can know who is giving to whom, we can do research, and we can add or withdraw our own support based on what we believe to be true about the people involved. This would put more influence and power back in the hands of the people. In the primaries we could, in a way, ride on the backs of the big money people to elect our choice of candidate.
Like you, I'm all for exposing true criminal activity. I'm all for swift and severe consequences and punishment. I am not in favor of guilt by drive by smearing before actual wrongdoing is determined...particularly when efforts are slanted toward one party more than the other during an election cycle.
I will not personally "pile on" when the media and democrat operatives do such a thorough job of smearing republicans on their own. What would be the point? Piling on will not expose anything or anyone, the press is already doing that. What it will do is give my political enemies (and I do consider some of them enemies; enemies of America) a helping hand...for free! This I will not do.
Bottom line, I prefer to leave the work of determining guilt to those who are actually working the case. I will also make sure the stuff that isn't given much media attention, that flies under the radar, is exposed and enjoys some daylight.
During an election cycle the stakes are too high to be "fair". I would not expect any military person to be fair when planning in battle...it is the same for me in politics.
I hate that people are so easily corruptable. I am also a realist on this one...people ARE corruptable, all people and in all walks of life. When the opportunity for power is high, as it is in politics, and the money is big (and it always will be in politics in a free society) the temptation factor also runs high. Wrongdoing must be exposed and prosecuted. This will fulfill the intent of the law but it will also encourage better choices by politicians. When Bill Clinton was given such a big pass it did a lot of damage to our entire culture.
Jack, I applaud your ongoing efforts in this. Your passion about the law is commendable and necessary and your points well taken. At the same time, the corrupt use of the legal system to destroy opponents should also be discouraged somehow.
Posted by: Tina at September 22, 2007 10:23 PM