We have already seen how money has greatly influenced our political landscape over the past few decades and this election cycle will be no exception. It was recently reported that one billionaire had pledged to contribute $180 million for re-election of the former president, he just recently decided not to make that type of commitment but still contributed millions. More and more of the ultra-rich are financially backing the former president based on his pledge to cut their taxes, regardless of how that will impact finances of the country. Most of these ultra-rich are making an investment hoping to get a good return on their investment. Ultimately greed is the prevailing sentiment motivating most of these big money political donors. If this risky economic strategy goes poorly in the U.S., they have the wherewithal to move anywhere in the world but the rest of us must live with the aftermath of the economic chaos and destruction.
The ultra-rich and major corporations don’t want much more than a return on investment for their contributions via tax cuts or specific tax loopholes and deregulation of their industry, so they can exploit their employees, gouge their customers, and harm the environment all in the name of profit. Understand it is the fiduciary duty of all corporations to maximize their profitability through all legal means. That is the essence of a society that operates under the economic principle of capitalism. Capitalism is an economic system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit. It is the responsibility of the government, at all levels, to police and appropriately regulate capitalism because they need to protect the citizens from the exploitation and excesses of capitalism. When the government abdicates that policing and regulating role, the bad aspects of capitalism come to the forefront of economic strategies by some corporations that then cause other corporations to follow this diabolical and destructive lead.
The reality is less than 5% of the voting age population politically contribute more than $50 and while most federal candidates speak often about small donor contributions, most political campaigns rely on deep pocket donors that max out their legal contributions and then contribute unknown amounts to dark money organizations. It is the dark money that is the most insidious and corruptible money in U.S. politics thanks to the Citizens United ruling back in 2010 by the Supreme Court. Because the U.S. political process lasts way too long it requires huge sums of money to effectively operate for many months. There is no good reason that the campaign for President starts in the year before the election is being held. A six-to-nine-month campaign would seem sufficient, but that would require legislation out of Congress that restricts the political process, and such legislation is not feasible with our current political dysfunction.
Those that formed this experiment in democracy, wrote the constitution, and had the vision of a country where government operated by, for and of the people evolving to form a more perfect union. They never envisioned, or perhaps they did but hoped for the better, the level of dysfunction in this grand experiment in self-governance. One of their concerns, among many, was that unscrupulous and unprincipled politicians would manipulate and deceive an uninformed public into making bad decisions about their political leadership. The result would be that their democratic experiment would fail to live up to their vision. They believed that an informed and educated public would be able to repel these scoundrel politicians and save democracy. They could not fathom the huge sums of money involved in political campaigns, largely to misinform and deceive the public into believing things that often defy logic and have no basis in fact. The example is a wannabe authoritarian dictator stating he will save democracy is something defying reason and logic but believed by millions of willfully ignorant and gullible people.
The money in politics has become obscene and controls who runs for political office and how they view who they serve once they attain political office. There will probably be more than $3 billion spent this election cycle when all campaign spending is tallied. Most of that money will come from a few thousand donors and those individuals expect substantial influence over the politicians and government for those donations. One current presidential candidate has stated to ultra rich and corporations that for their donations to his campaign, they can expect tax cuts and greater deregulation in return for their financial support. Direct quid pro quo, no pretense or disguise of political intentions, just a basic business transaction. I doubt our forefathers would consider this is how they foresaw this grand experiment in self-governance working. Unless there is some significant lessening of the influence of money in our election process and fewer self-indulgent, greedy politicians, it will be hard to accomplish much that creates a more perfect union.
