Democracy for Sale

A Government for the Rich BUY the Rich

Dear America,

It is clear this letter is arriving during turbulent times for our nation; with so many justifiable grievances going unanswered. It is important to remember that “as long as there is government, there will be differences of opinion.” However, it's becoming increasingly clear that many believe our troubles run deeper than a mere difference of opinion. When experiencing justifiable grievances, it is only natural for one to attempt to identify the source of the problem and the culprits impeding reasonable resolutions.

In our haste, we look up and spot our neighbors standing across the aisle. Upon a quick assessment, we determine that our neighbors do not share in our grievances, they do not see the validity in our cries, nor do they agree on “The” solutions. We determine that they ignore simple truths and facts and label them deniers. We, therefore, come to the logical conclusion that if they are not with us, surely, they are against us.

On any particular issue, this indeed might be true-they might be against you. But if we examine all our grievances simultaneously, it becomes clear that there’s an overarching problem that connects everything and prevents progress on all fronts. This problem transcends political affiliation and ideological beliefs.  This overarching problem has: (1) turned our government from being “of the people, for the people, by the people” to an aristocratic form of government; (2) corrupted the information we receive; and (3) calls into question the status of our most basic right: the right to self-govern. This overarching issue is simply referred to as CAMPAIGN FINANCE.

"For the People…” 

In any government that is to be for the people, shared grievances should not go unresolved. Politicians who are driven by the pursuit of power should only be able to obtain power by acting on behalf of the many instead of the few. In such a well-formed government, no grievances should be shared across the political spectrum as politicians would benefit from solving such issues by gaining additional support from prior non-voters. Regrettably, there are numerous examples of our shared grievances that our politicians continually ignore.

• 99.99% Want to stop School Shootings

• 83% want a Constitutional Amendment for Term Limits

• 80% of Americans think Congress is FAILING to do their job

• 77% want caps on political donations

• 75% believe members of Congress shouldn’t trade stocks

• 62% of Americans want a 3rd party

• 150 Shared Grievances

Perhaps this is why Congress’s approval rating has remained near 20% for an extended period of time. The existence of these unresolved shared grievances allows us to conclude: 

• Our politician’s motives no longer align with ours

• Our politicians are not acting on behalf of the people

• The government is representative in theory alone

When we look at Congress’s 20% approval rating alongside the incumbent’s average relection rate of 97% It is clear that members of Congress are motivated to only: (1) focus on raising more funds than their opponents; (2) weaponizing emotional issues to institute fear and anger; and (3) be the lesser of two evils in the election. Campaign finance has perverted the motives of our so-called leaders and thereby hindered the voice of the free people. 

'“It is in man’s nature to be unsatisfied, always wanting more. Politicians successfully exploit this basic nature.”

To raise money there are two main methods: (1) make promises to large corporate donors or aristocrats or (2) weaponize issues important to the people. A clear example of the latter is Roe v. Wade. Despite Democrats controlling the House and Senate at multiple points, not once did they attempt to codify Roe v. Wade. Instead, they continued to use it to raise funds and demonstrate they are the lesser of two evils. This became immediately clear when the DNC sent out mass text messages asking for money once the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The DNC used the Supreme Court decision to raise $80 Million dollars within a week, so their strategy worked as planned. What a simply effective playbook. 

During the last 13 elections, candidates have spent more than $87.43 billion on their campaigns; while lobbyists spent ~84B. This does not include dark money which is hidden from the public eye. With this much money up for grabs, even the most simple-minded can understand that the politicians are bought. 

No group can receive billions without massive chains attached to their ankles.

In the 2022 elections, ~72% of donations were nearly evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, from 5 sectors. We see a similar pattern in all elections. Even those politicians we believe have not been purchased, indeed are on the take (AOC & Donald Trump). 

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair

Paid Not to Know

At this point, one may wonder why this story is not widely talked about by major news outlets like the NY Times, CNN, NBC, CBS, FOX, and others. The answer is simple: campaign contributions become advertising dollars. If they were to make the public aware of this issue and changes occurred then they would be financially hurt. If media companies are financially tied to contributions, then it is only logical to assume that their reporting is also affected by larger donor's opinions. As political donors are media companies’ customers. Below are comments from management teams during their earnings calls where they call out campaign contributions (Source: FactSet Transcripts). 

CBS Management Comments during 3Q & 4Q 2016 Earnings Calls 

“At CBS News, our broadcasts have thrived during this election season thanks to our hard news profile and original reporting.” 3Q16 earnings Call CEO Leslie Moonves

“And in local advertising, we had a record-setting year with fourth quarter political spending up 25% over the last presidential election.” - COO Joseph Lanniello 4Q16 Earnings Call

Fox Management Comments during 1Q22 Earnings 

“It is worth noting that this total company growth was achieved despite the comparison to the prior-year quarter, when we generated nearly $100 million in net political advertising revenues...” – CFO Steve Tomsic 1Q22 Earnings Call

“…I think you connected that with some of the political revenues that we've seen over this past 12 months and what we're continuing to see. And we believe the midterm elections and contests next year bode to be truly staggering” – CEO Lachlan Murdoch 11/3/21 1Q22 earnings call

Comcast (Owner of NBC) 3Q & 4Q 2021 Earnings Calls 

“And advertising revenue increased 34% year over year or 2.2% excluding political, which almost doubled presidential election cycle in 2016.” – CFO Michael Cavanagh 01/28/2021 4Q21 earnings call

“Advertising revenue increased 12% year-over-year due to strong political advertising which was up 70% over what we had generated in the last presidential election in 2016. Core advertising, excluding political, was down 6.8% year-over-year…” - CFO Michael Cavanagh 3Q21 earnings call

As we can see, revenue from political campaigns is growing and appears to be very profitable. This leaves one wondering: how much ad spending is required for the "journalists" to be purchased? At what dollar amount can all networks be bought? Would any network allow their "journalists" to really challenge a candidate and risk losing millions of dollars? If we were to trace campaign advertising dollars to the networks, we would likely be able to see why reporters and networks hold their views. 

It is in man’s nature to be unsatisfied, always wanting more and for things to be better. Politicians successfully exploit this basic nature of people. 

Solutions

To maintain a government predicated on the idea of self-government and to successfully resolve our grievances, we must put an end to the corrupting influence of money in politics. If we fail to address this issue, we will never be able to resolve any other issue. Campaign contributions, in essence, are legalized forms of bribery.

To address this problem, we must all become single-issue voters. We must not elect anyone who does not support or initiate the process of creating a constitutional amendment to ban all forms of campaign contributions. If both candidates do not support this, we must refuse to vote and instead protest on election day, thereby encouraging future candidates to join our cause.

Campaign funds should come from the federal government or from individuals who choose to donate to the election process. These funds should be evenly split between candidates based on the state they are running in, with no opposing candidate having more money than another. If large donors wish to advocate for a policy, they should do so publicly without endorsing any political candidate.

The idea that corporations are people is potentially the most absurd notion to have come out of the Supreme Court. Even if corporations or their CEOs donate large sums of money, it does not entitle them to preferential treatment or quicker access to elected officials. Our founders warned against the corrupting influence of money in politics, but we have ignored their words of wisdom.

All campaign contribution & Lobbyist information throughout the piece comes from www.OpenSecrets.org.