.
Feedback

What Kind of Government Do You Want?

Our government is for sale—thanks to the Supreme Court and Citizens United. Will we let a few anonymous rich guys and their Super PACs buy their way to power?

Ours is for sale.

We are not a theocracy, despite what Christians may think. Strictly speaking, we’re not a one man, one vote democracy either. Increasingly, we have become a plutocracy, a government of wealth.

Do you have as much influence as, let’s say, Gulf Oil Company, or the National Rifle Association, or the Chamber of Commerce, or billionaire Diane Hendricks— who contributed more than $500,000 to help re-elect Wisconsin Congressman Scott Walker, and, incidentally, paid absolutely no taxes in 2010? Can you and your friends get together and contribute the almost $2,200 per hour Diane Feinstein must raise in order to remain in Congress? Probably not—that would take millions, or, at least a Super PAC and a couple of anonymous rich guys from somewhere—they don’t have to say who or from where.

It takes a fortune to get elected to City Council. It takes hundreds of millions to get elected President. But all it takes for the rich to rule is deregulation.

Thanks to the Supreme Court and Citizens United, you can say goodbye to any regulations on the financial market. In his majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy opined:“This court now concludes that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.” In other words, corporations are people, money is speech, and there is no corruption. What the hell was he smoking?

Suggestion—a plea, really: demand full disclosure—vote to know who spends how much on what! Vote for laws that promote transparency. Vote for fair, just regulations on Wall Street, banks and the so-called free market. Do not vote against collective bargaining—union workers should have a say in government, just like their bosses.

Republicans do not want workers to have a say—period! Republicans do not want any regulations on the financial or any other market. And Republicans want to pay lower taxes than they do in Abu Dhabi. My suggestion for Republicans: stop drinking the tea.

Jac Flanders is the author of “What I Learned On The Way Down,” eBook and paperback versions from Amazon.com

Jac Flanders June 30, 2012 at 05:15 pm
Thanks, Susan. I hoped someone would make the connection.
Jac Flanders June 30, 2012 at 05:21 pm
It may sound far-fetched, Selina, but some friends in Florida are thinking closer to home.
Komfort June 30, 2012 at 05:51 pm
I was focusing on the undue influence angle, Jac. But since you are talking about tax evasion, I'll throw some of that in too. Here is one of Obama's bundlers:
"Oklahoma billionaire George Kaiser has been in the headlines in recent months thanks to his role as a major investor in Solyndra LLC, the now-bankrupt California solar panel maker hailed by President Obama as a model for America's "clean energy future." ...But the Solyndra scandal is far from Kaiser's first brush with political controversy. As the Sunlight Foundation's Bill Allison reports today, Kaiser has become extraordinarily wealthy by taking advantage of the federal tax code in ways that some tax experts - including the IRS - believe to be illegal. As Allison describes it in his Sunlight post today, "in one six year period, during which he increased his net worth enough to land him on the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest Americans, Kaiser reported taxable income to the Internal Revenue Service just once, totaling $11,699--equivalent to a full-time hourly wage of $5.62."" Lousy Republicans!
Things I Learned June 30, 2012 at 06:11 pm
You know who else is on the Forbes 400?
http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/gallery/diane-hendricks http://www.forbes.com/profile/diane-hendricks/ Wanna hear how she and her husband got there without cheating on their taxes?
Komfort June 30, 2012 at 06:20 pm
Here is a Republican, Jac.
" I find the future outlined by the testimony presented to this sub-committee to be indescribably dreary and depressing. It paints a future of increasingly severe government-induced shortages, higher and higher electricity and water prices, massive taxpayer subsidies to politically well-connected and favored industries, and a permanently declining quality of life for our children who will be required to stretch and ration every drop of water and every watt of electricity in their bleak and dimly lit homes – homes in which gravel replaces green lawns and the toilets constantly back up. I see a different future for our nation: I see a new era of clean, cheap and abundant hydro-electricity. I see great new reservoirs to store water in wet years to assure abundance in dry ones. I see a future in which families can enjoy the prosperity that abundant water and electricity provides; and the quality of life that comes from that prosperity. I see a nation whose children can look forward to a green lawn, a backyard garden, a family swimming pool, affordable air-conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter, brightly lit homes and cities and abundant and affordable groceries from America’s agricultural cornucopia. These are two very different visions of America, and a choice must be made – not just by this subcommittee or this Congress, but by the American people." http://mcclintock.house.gov/2012/03/examining-the-proposed-fiscal-year.shtml
Jac Flanders June 30, 2012 at 06:20 pm
Scott - you seem to be saying that lobbyists are okay, and we can't stop them from influencing our elected representatives. Can we stop them from bribing our representatives - with the millions of dollars it takes to get elected? Not without some regulations, I think. Certainly not without transparency and accountability! And, you can't take a corporation to church with you next Sunday. It isn't that pesky Constitution that worries me (well, a little, maybe). It's that pesky Supreme Court.
Komfort June 30, 2012 at 06:25 pm
Or do you prefer the Republicans that give tax breaks to their billionaire friends that don't pay taxes.
" The U.S Department of Energy wasn't the only government agency to invest heavily in Solyndra, the solar panel manufacturer that filed for bankruptcy earlier this month. Last November, an obscure state board agreed to give the Fremont-based company a $34.5 million tax break, the largest one handed out under an alternative-energy subsidy law signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Schwarzenegger attended Solyndra's groundbreaking in September 2009 and declared it a cause for "great celebration." Schwarzenegger used the event to push for the tax breaks to help clean technology companies buy equipment for "design, manufacture, production, or assembly" operations in California. He said the subsidies would create new jobs for laid-off auto workers at the shuttered NUMMI plant a few miles away." http://www.baycitizen.org/solyndra/story/schwarzennegers-solyndra-subsidy/ Cronies.
Things I Learned June 30, 2012 at 07:02 pm
Join the club.
Scott H. Kidwell June 30, 2012 at 07:53 pm
Human nature being what it is, we can never remove the influence of lobbying in it's many forms. We are all capable of being corrupted. Transparency and the full light of public knowledge of all their doings is one of the best ways to keep elected officials from falling further into that abyss that they might otherwise. That and no government retirement and benefits plus term limits to send them back into the world they helped create. We were supposed to have citizen legislators for a short season and not professional politicians sucking off the public teat while handing out patronage to keep getting reelected. It is best to counter the personal interest and ambition of the politicians by showing to everyone that it runs counter to the individuals sovereign rights, interest and ambitions.
Belinda Rachman, Esq. June 30, 2012 at 08:19 pm
Until you have read this article and can articulate what EXACTLY is untrue, you really do NOT have all the information to have an informed opinion about the direction our country is taking or how to fix what ails us.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2056723,00.html?xid=fblike
Janet Mercer-Grey June 30, 2012 at 08:55 pm
Well, if Mexico is going to have so many of their citizens come to the US for medical and schooling and for voting, why can't their companies also have some say in who gets elected? There really is no such thing as an illegal person so aren't their unions and companies and drug cartels persons too?
Jac Flanders June 30, 2012 at 09:26 pm
Wow - that's an incredible statement, councilor. And are you planning to explain what is EXACTLY true and untrue - or do we just study Time Magazine? And please, do tell us your informed opinion about the direction our country is taking and how to fix what ails us. I have read the article, by the way - I must have missed a few things.
Things I Learned June 30, 2012 at 09:32 pm
"We have the most crime among rich countries."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2056723,00.html?xid=fblike Overall Crime Rates per Person Sweden 0.1300 United Kingdom 0.1048 Belgium 0.0889 Netherlands 0.0850 Germany 0.0795 Austria 0.0654 France 0.0576 South Africa 0.0531 Switzerland 0.0387 United States 0.0378 http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-crime-total-crimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population#List
Belinda Rachman, Esq. July 1, 2012 at 09:09 pm
I think the article is pretty comprehensive. If you aren't concerned after reading it, I can't explain it to you any better.
Kevin George July 2, 2012 at 12:55 pm
I don't think I have ever read anyone fail so badly at trying to be be unbiased.
Jac Flanders July 2, 2012 at 09:06 pm
Kevin, I am definitely biased - that's the whole point of writing the blog. It's bigotry I despise, conservatism I disagree with, and Tea Party activists I never hope to convert. Otherwise, I just hope to get a conversation going - and swap a few opinions. Thanks for yours.
Things I Learned July 2, 2012 at 09:29 pm
"Kenneth A. Hendricks (September 8, 1941 – December 21, 2007) was a businessman who grew a shingle supply company into a $2.6 billion fortune and a spot on the Forbes 400....
Hendricks... was a high school dropout who joined his father in the roofing business, reshingling houses on weekends. He eventually started his own firm, which grew into a 500-man multi-state operation by 1971, a time when most roofers were still local. After giving the company to the employees so he would have more personal time, he started ABC Supply by purchasing 3 failing Bird and Sons locations. Through the years ABC Supply has expanded to almost 500 stores through new start-ups and acquisitions.... Hendricks and his wife Diane owned and ran several other companies through the Hendricks Group. He was known for his interest in green building technology, and was set to build an environmentally friendly roof for a complex at the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Hendricks
Craig Maxwell July 2, 2012 at 09:34 pm
"I'm a bigot. But for the left, fortunately." Woody Allen in Annie Hall
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soczkiJea0Y
Jac Flanders July 2, 2012 at 10:19 pm
Irony, humor and sarcasm are a winning hand. Woody has all three - in spades.
David B Secor July 3, 2012 at 01:47 am
Try reading your stuff.
Things I Learned July 3, 2012 at 02:21 am
http://splicd.com/UCqVv2vbI1c/46/251
Kevin George July 3, 2012 at 12:11 pm
Interesting Jac, could you give me an example of some bigotry you despise?
Things I Learned July 3, 2012 at 12:45 pm
"Do you know the song ‘The Little Man'?" asks Kenneth Hendricks as he drives a visitor around Beloit, Wis. in his black Jeep Grand Cherokee. The Alan Jackson song is one of Hendricks' favorites. He plays it, and then plays it again, imploring his guest to listen to the words, a melancholic ode to disappearing Main Street merchants and values, done in by large corporations and discount chain stores on the outskirts of town.
The song may be a bit hokey, but the 62-year-old Hendricks identifies with the underdog. As a kid growing up in nearby Janesville, he sensed the contempt "the country club set" had for his blue-collar family because of his father's humble job as a roofer. "They looked down their noses at him," Hendricks says. "He went to work every single day of his life. That wasn't good enough? Some kid got to go to a fancy school and that made him different than me? That just sets in your gut." ... An aspiring architect, Hendricks dropped out of high school at 17, when his girlfriend got pregnant. He took two jobs, one on a repair truck for Wisconsin Power & Light. While driving around town he kept his eyes peeled for houses with worn shingles. After his shift he'd go back, knock on the door and offer to reshingle the roof that weekend.
Things I Learned July 3, 2012 at 12:48 pm
"Soon he was able to quit the power company job and hire his own roofing crews. He nailed his first big break when a hailstorm hit the central Wisconsin town of Berlin. As always after a hailstorm, roofing contractors descended, jacking up their normal rates. Hendricks took the insurance company's claims adjuster to dinner and offered to charge his regular rate in exchange for combining all the damaged roofs under one contract. The next time a hailstorm hit a nearby town, he was called back. The work led to contracts to roof military bases and eventually Kmarts. By 1971, not yet 30 years old, he had, he estimates, 500 roofers working for him around the country.
But overseeing dozens of simultaneous job sites kept him on the road for months at a time. For a man with five kids it was an unsustainable pace. He burned out and gave away the business in pieces to his employees...." http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2004/1129/184_print.html
Craig Maxwell July 3, 2012 at 01:58 pm
Uh, oh!--sounds like Secor got up on the wrong side of the bed again. How long before he starts calling those who disagree with him "sociopaths?"
And I agree, Jac; Allen must be one of the funniest men who's ever lived. (Evidently however, his comic gifts are lost on certain people participating in this exchange. I won't mention any names, but here's a hint: he's currently running for office, and wears a stupid hat.)
Ned July 6, 2012 at 04:19 pm
Corporations are not people and money is property not speech.
Things I Learned July 6, 2012 at 04:33 pm
Corporations are not associations of people and speech that requires money is not speech.
Kevin George July 6, 2012 at 05:05 pm
Sociopath? How about latent homosexual, he really likes that one.
Katheryn October 1, 2012 at 01:01 pm
I want a better government, not what is being shown in this link from the Patch. Please click on the You Tube Link below and then watch the You Tube Video in the story. If you are as angry as many of us are then please add this video to your Facebook, we need to get the word out to the world.
http://temecula.patch.com/articles/citizen-reader-shares-mining-sounds
Komfort April 20, 2013 at 09:44 am
http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/19/city-of-boston-gave-subsidy-to-bombing-suspects-radical-mosque/

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Encinitas Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Dr. Michele Drake June 19, 2013 at 11:50 am
The benefit garage and bake sale is this Saturday, June 22 from 7 a.m. to noon at 1463 Golden SunsetRead More Drive in San Marcos (San Elijo Hills). Here's the link to the event: http://encinitas.patch.com/groups/events/p/drake-center-garage-sale-to-benefit-autism-therapy-dog_3a2145e8
Dr. Michele Drake June 19, 2013 at 11:50 am
All donated items can be dropped off at The Drake Center, located at 195 N. El Camino Real inRead More Encinitas.
Mary E June 19, 2013 at 04:01 pm
do you get a donation receipt for tax purposes?
Vicki Campbell June 17, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Prop A will help residents and stop greedy developers from buying city council. Vote YES
Rick Moore June 18, 2013 at 09:27 am
I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation that folks read the initiative. When you readRead More sections 6 and 9, you will see that Prop A sets a 30-foot or 2-story ceiling across the entire city, overriding lower height limits in many areas. The Downtown Specific Plan limits residences to 22-26 feet, as detailed on the DEMA website, so Prop A would actually allow the building of taller homes. It makes no exemptions or allowances for historic buildings like La Paloma, church towers or other structures over 30 feet high; the only exceptions are medical complexes and public high schools (see clause 6.2). Rebuilding or renovating (more than 50%) would require expensive public votes. Should the SRF be required to pay for an election to rebuild the Lotus Tower? Such contingencies are allowed for in our Historic Overlay Zone, which would clearly be overridden by Prop A. So is the Encinitas Preservation Association's plan to convert one of the boathouses to a museum. Again, Prop A would require an election (see section 4.1, clause e), which the EPA cannot afford. Prop A would thus favor large developers who have the money, time, lawyers and other resources to campaign for their project. How many nonprofits and small businessmen can afford to spend a minimum $30,000 just to get their project on a general election ballot (upwards of $300,000 for a special election like this one)? Yes, folks, please read the initiative, especially Section 9, which lays waste to anything that conflicts with it. That's why this has been dubbed Propzilla. I trust that most Encinitas citizens are smart enough to see that this meausre is deeply flawed, problematic and counter-productive. We can find much better ways to limit growth and preserve community character.
BlueAngel2 June 18, 2013 at 10:20 am
SAVE ENCINITAS FROM RANCID DEVELOPERS. VOTE YES ON PROP A!
BlueAngel2 June 15, 2013 at 09:47 pm
It would NOT surprise me. I thought we dumped Stocks. Why is he still around?
Encinitas YES on A June 16, 2013 at 02:44 pm
My YES on Prop. A sign was stolen yesterday. Other YES on Prop. A signs are disappearing. YetRead More another deceptive and untruthful mailer from the opponents of Prop. A was in my mail box. There's a shrillness and desperation in their opposition. They can't rely on facts and fair play. Polling data not looking good?
BlueAngel2 June 16, 2013 at 03:17 pm
YES ON PROP A will be victorious!
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 11:20 am
It just goes to show if Stocks or any of his puppets are involved, you will not hear the truth aboutRead More this proposition. They continue to confuse the issue. Please do not throw your vote away to ruin our city and enhance the developer's pockets who do not care what they do to our beautiful Encinitas. Vote YES on PROP A!
Status Quo June 19, 2013 at 11:53 am
Looks very much like your Prop A will pass, though 'BA2's tactic seems to be part of the problemRead More also.
TB-ENC June 7, 2013 at 02:01 pm
How is this not a racist group with Hispanics in California at 14 million second behind whites atRead More 14.8 million. We only need one chamber to represent all Californians.
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 02:09 pm
So any group other than white is a racist group?
Miranda Klassen June 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Congrats to all on the groundbreaking. Reesey has done an incredible job with making Lux what it isRead More today!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction orRead More development to make decisions for us.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
Prop A will not control growth. It will make sure that BOTH the council and the public get toRead More directly weigh in on the deals being brokered between big developers and the city. This won't end the indirect developer subsidies, but it sure will help.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:26 am
Yes, it will help to slow growth, by making sure that the public approves raising height limits orRead More upzoning, for developments over the parameters of a MAXIMUM of 30 ft. and two stories. Lower set height limits will not be repealed, because they are not in conflict with the initiative or the General Plan. David Ahlgren's fear and speculation is not backed up by one single fact. He just raises the usual building industry "mantra" of alleged risks created by unnamed "unintended consequences." Council's attempt at a preemptive ordinance does NOT guarantee that will be placed on the ballot in 2014, and does NOT eliminate other loopholes such as the "less-than-5-acre" exception, the "categorization of intensity of use" exception, and the height limit exception. The only loophole that Council's drafted ordinance affects is Council's ability to vote by a 4/5 supermajority on upzoing if it is done with respect to a "significant public benefit." Not only is Council's recently drafted ordinance NOT guaranteed, in that a future Council could reverse it, if it is not enacted through a public vote, but also Council's attempt at preempting the "right to vote on upzoning and raising height limits initiative" DOESN"T eliminate the other loopholes that still exist in our General Plan, Policy 3.12., which exceptions I've spelled out, here.