Sunday, March 9, 2025

Legalized Bribery

Today I will follow up on yesterday’s post where I shared the argument that America’s federal government is too small, not too big and listed the requirements of real freedom.

Heather Cox Richardson in her post today reported that Acting Social Security commissioner Leland Dudek plans to cut another 7,000 employees (about 12%) from Social Services even though their numbers are already at a 50 year low. A common strategy of the right is to starve an agency for funding to the point where it can no longer provide the services it was created to do, and then use that as an excuse to privatize it or just do away with it altogether. That appears to be what is happening here.

Thom Hartmann wrote today about the insanity of America having billionaires while one in five American children go hungry and people resort to crowdfunding to pay for cancer treatment, selling their life insurance to pay for hospital bills or setting up reverse mortgages just to survive. He quoted the Center for American Progress:

“America’s hunger crisis is not due to a lack of food production or scarcity in food supply. Rather, hunger and food insecurity in the United States are symptoms of policy choices and an economic system that prioritizes the needs of corporations and the wealthy over those of the general population.”

Hartmann then pointed out that the increase in wealth of the four richest Americans averaged $100 billion each year for the last four years. The cost to end child poverty in America is estimated at $25 billion. The economic cost to America from child malnutrition is estimated at $167.5 billion.  A 25% tax on capital gains on just these four people could eliminate child poverty and save $167 billion. Now that’s efficiency!

At 7% capital gains tax is already too low, bringing in less than $1 billion in taxes each year, but the Republicans are trying to repeal it.

Hartmann then explains why, in a democratic country, Congress repeatedly passes legislation that favors the wealthy over the majority of the people. He puts much of the blame on three Supreme Court decisions that legalized bribery of politicians.

In Buckley v Valeo (1976) the court ruled that limits on campaign spending was unconstitutional and that the First Amendment on free speech also applies to money. In First National Bank v Bellotti (1978) the court ruled essentially that corporations are people with the same right to unlimited campaign spending. These rulings were supported in Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010) which ruled that laws restricting political spending of corporations and unions are inconsistent with the First Amendment.

This ruling has opened the gates to a flood of corporate money, often hidden through organizations, that have strongly influenced the voting of politicians. They no longer work for their constituents (including the people that voted for them) but for the billionaires and corporations that “own” them. As an example, Hartmann points out that Republican politicians receive so much money from the fossil fuel industry that nearly all refuse to recognize the reality of climate change.

Hartmann explains this and much more in his book The Hidden History of the Supreme Court and the Betrayal of America (2019).

No wonder the middle class has gotten poorer over the past 4 decades. Since the first Supreme Court rulings legalizing bribery, $50 trillion of wealth has been redistributed from the bottom 90% of Americans to the top 1%.

Sources:

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/march-8-2025

https://hartmannreport.com/p/americas-sickest-reality-show-crowdfunding

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-united-states-can-end-hunger-and-food-insecurity-for-millions-of-people/

https://www.amazon.com/History-Supreme-Betrayal-America-Hartmann/dp/1523085940/ref=thomhartmann

https://time.com/5888024/50-trillion-income-inequality-america/

 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Are All Men Born Equal?

In her March 9 substack post Heather Cox Richardson discussed the Declaration of Independence, particularly the following passage We hold ...