'Big Government'
Isn't the Problem, Big Money Is
March 21,
2012 | This
article appeared in the April 9, 2012 edition of The Nation.
Republican
presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney responds to
cheers from the crowd as he speaks at a campaign rally at West Hills Elementary
School in Knoxville, Tenn., Sunday, March 4, 2012. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
Conservatives
love to rail against “big government.” But the surge of cynicism engulfing the
nation isn’t about government’s size. It flows from a growing perception that
government doesn’t work for average people but for big business, Wall Street and
the very rich—who, in effect, have bought it. In a recent Pew poll, 77 percent
of respondents said too much power is in the hands of a few rich people and
corporations.
Robert
Reich, a former secretary of labor, is the Chancellor’s Professor of Public
Policy at the University of...
Surging
inequality, not Wall Street banditry, is the underlying cause of the Great
Recession.
That
view is understandable. Wall Street got bailed out by taxpayers, but one out of
every three homeowners with a mortgage is underwater, caught in the tsunami
caused by the Street’s excesses. The bailout wasn’t conditioned on the banks
helping these homeowners, and subsequent help has been meager. The recent settlement
of claims against the banks is tiny compared with how much homeowners have
lost. Millions of people are losing their homes or simply walking away from
mortgage payments they can no longer afford.
Homeowners
can’t use bankruptcy to reorganize their mortgage loans because the banks have
engineered laws to prohibit this. Banks have also made it extremely difficult
for young people to use bankruptcy to reorganize their student loans. Yet
corporations routinely use bankruptcy to renege on contracts. American
Airlines, which is in bankruptcy, plans to fire 13,000 people—
16 percent of its workforce—while
cutting back health benefits for current employees. It also intended to
terminate its underfunded pension plans, until the government agency charged with
picking up the tab screamed so loudly that American backed off and proposed to
freeze the plans.
Not
a day goes by without Republicans decrying the budget deficit. But its biggest
driver is Big Money’s corruption of Washington. One of the federal budget’s
largest and fastest-growing programs is Medicare, whose costs would be far
lower if drug companies reduced their prices. It hasn’t happened because Big
Pharma won’t allow it. Medicare’s administrative costs are only 3 percent, far
below the 10 percent average of private insurers. So it would be logical to
tame rising healthcare costs by allowing any family to opt in. That was the
idea behind the “public option.” But health insurers stopped it in its tracks.
The
other big budget expense is defense. The US spends more on its military than
China, Russia, Britain, France, Japan and Germany combined. The “basic”
military budget (the annual cost of paying troops and buying planes, ships and
tanks—not including the costs of actually fighting wars) keeps growing. With
the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, the cost of fighting wars is
projected to drop—but the base budget is scheduled to rise. It’s already about
25 percent higher than it was a decade ago, adjusted for inflation. One big
reason is that it’s almost impossible to terminate large military contracts.
Defense contractors have cultivated sponsors on Capitol Hill and located their
facilities in politically important districts. Lockheed, Raytheon and others
have made national defense America’s biggest jobs program.
“Big
government” isn’t the problem. The problem is the Big Money that’s taking over
government. Government is doing fewer of the things most of us want it to
do—providing good public schools and affordable access to college, improving
infrastructure, maintaining safety nets and protecting the public from
dangers—and more of the things big corporations, Wall Street and wealthy
plutocrats want it to do.
Some
conservatives argue that we wouldn’t have to worry about this if we had a
smaller government to begin with, because big government attracts Big Money. On
ABC’s This Week a few
months ago, Congressman Paul Ryan told me that “if the power and money are
going to be here in Washington…that’s where the powerful are going to go to
influence it.” Ryan has it upside down. A smaller government that’s still
dominated by money would continue to do the bidding of Wall Street, the
pharmaceutical industry, oil companies, agribusiness, big insurance, military
contractors and rich individuals. It just wouldn’t do anything else.
Millionaires
and billionaires aren’t donating to politicians out of generosity. They
consider these expenditures to be investments, and they expect a good return on
them. Experts say the 2012 elections are likely to be the priciest ever,
costing an estimated $6 billion. “It is far worse than it has ever been,” says
Senator John McCain. And all restraints on spending are off now that the
Supreme Court has determined that money is “speech” and corporations are
“people.”
I
don’t know where the Occupy movement is heading, but I do know there’s more
grassroots energy for progressive change than I’ve seen in decades. The
question is how to channel it into a sustainable movement. If you believe as I
do that Obama and the Democrats didn’t push hard enough in the president’s
first term for the things we believe in, we must push harder next term.
We
also must engage with people who may disagree. Reach across to independents,
even to Republicans and self-styled Tea Partiers. Find people who are open to
arguments and ideas, regardless of the label they apply to themselves. We must
also get out of our issue cocoons. It’s fine to fight against climate change,
or to push for gay rights or a single-payer health system. But we can’t be so
mesmerized by any single issue that we fail to take on the stuff that makes it
harder for average Americans to be heard on these issues and more: the growing
concentration of income, wealth and political power at the top; the increasing
clout of global corporations and Wall Street; and the corruption of our
democracy.
Don’t
focus solely on Washington or entirely on elections. Corporate
campaigns—consumer boycotts of companies behind the largest political
contributions, media attention to those that award top executives the fattest
compensation packages while laying off the most workers—can play an important
role. And when candidates are the targets, don’t wait for them to emerge with
agendas and policy positions. Take an active role in creating those agendas—and
get candidates to run on them.
We
should demand, for example, that the marginal income tax on the top 1 percent
return to what it was before 1981—at least 70 percent; that a transactions tax
be imposed on all Wall Street deals; that distressed homeowners be allowed to
reorganize their mortgages under bankruptcy; that Medicare be available to all;
that the basic military budget be cut by at least 25 percent over the next
decade; that the Glass-Steagall Act be resurrected and Wall Street’s biggest
banks be broken up; and that all political contributions be disclosed, public
financing be made available to candidates in general elections and a
constitutional amendment be enacted to reverse Citizens United.
Tell
incumbents you’ll work your heart out to get them re-elected on condition they
campaign on such an agenda. If and when they’re elected, keep up the heat and
the support. Too many of us think political activism begins a few months before
election day and ends when winners are announced.
The
day after election day is the real beginning. Newly elected officials must know
that we will continue to mobilize support for a progressive agenda, reward them
for pushing it and hold them accountable in the next election cycle if they
don’t. We will even go so far as to run candidates against them in their next
primary—candidates who will run on that agenda.
Progressives
must take back our economy and our democracy from a regressive right backed by
a plutocracy that has taken over both. The stakes are especially high. It will
not be easy to accomplish. But it must be done. And it is within your power—our
power—to do it.
March
21, 2012 | This
article appeared in the April 9, 2012 edition of The Nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment