When the Cutting Is Corrupted

With indicted superlobbyist Jack Abramoff reportedly ready to cooperate with prosecutors and his partner, Michael Scanlon, already singing, 2006 is expected to be the year of congressional scandals.

Lord knows, a housecleaning in the Capitol is definitely in order. But the Abramoff scandal is just part of the corruption of our political system. There is another level of special-interest influence that cannot be handled by prosecutors: Only the voters can render a judgment on a politics of favoritism that has created a new Gilded Age. It's clear that the national government has placed itself squarely on the side of the wealthy, the privileged and the connected.

Rarely does a single action by Congress serve as so powerful an example of how the system is working. The recent budget bill, which squeaked through the House and Senate just before Christmas, is a road map of insider dealing. It shows that when choices have to be made, the interests of the poor and the middle class fall before the wishes of interest groups with powerful lobbies and awesome piles of campaign money to distribute.

Republican majorities in the Senate and House insisted that they wanted to cut the federal budget. But the Senate and House offered competing plans for achieving savings. When it came time to meld the two proposals, almost every choice congressional leaders made favored the interest groups.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/26/AR2005122600532.html

is "Republican majorities in the Senate and House.....". I think they're giving the "G"reedy "O"ld "P"arty too big of a break here. With few exceptions it's the Republican Party that has been totally corrupted by the special interest groups. It's the Republican Party that has sold our government to the highest bidder. Democrats (and a handful of Republicans) have been trying for years to get significant campaign finance reform laws passed, but the "G"reedy "O"ld "P"arty won't have it.
I think the writer should give credit where credit is due. The GOP is almost totally responsible for the grievances the writer has with PACs and SIGs, why doesn't he just come right out and say it? According to him it's a bipartisan problem and that's not even close to the truth. Sure, there are some money hungry Democrats that are on the Corporate payroll as well, but their numbers pale in comparison to that of the Republicans.

Republican Majority over and over again. Yes, he is biased but leans heavily toward our side. He's one of the very few good guys. And he proudly calls himself a liberal.

AIPAC, need I say more? Politicos on both sides of the aisle are willing to sell out their constiuents for their loaded corporate donors. Think bankruptcy bill.

but to play the game you must play by the rules of the game. Dems need money to play at all. We must change the rules and remove corporate money. If corporations feel so strongly that they have to contribute let them give to fund that gives to money to all the candidates.

No corporate money at all. We need to have Santa Clara v Southern Pacific revisited ASAP, but with this group of Supremes it ain't going to happen.

I agree that money is needed to play, but that sure makes certain groups a hell of a lot more equal than others, does it not? Clean election reform is a major cause of mine, in case you couldn't guess...