183 Comments

Thank you professor, I am still doing badly, in part because, it is so hard not to think that I, and almost everyone, I actually know, are just pawns for the rich and powerful. To be used when useful and discarded when not. Other countries are, I believe, and you are teaching us, ruining the USA. It hurts my heart.

Expand full comment
author

Fred, I understand your feeling of powerlessness. The reality is **we** who are not white supremacists and not billionaires far outnumber those who fall into these two camps. It's our duty to come together and reject white supremacists and prevent the billionaires from taking over our politics. I believe we will.

Expand full comment

So true. The Professor asks "What do you think?" and my immediate gut response was, "I think I'm going to throw up.".... It's so much worse than I realized. However, money is not EVERYTHING. Just look at the success people like Bernie and Beto have had just off small donors, period. Yes, EVERYBODY needs to vote against unscrupulous candidates. But it's even more important to get involved where possible, volunteering for the right candidates (which can be done locally or from afar [just ask them how], helping people to register or get to the polls, utilizing social media to refute lies and replace them with facts - helping those who say they have given up to see how important their vote or even $1.00 contribution is - helping those unsure of a candidate find valid info about those who deserve publicity and votes - writing letters to the editor (esp in smaller, local papers), etc.

Expand full comment

I agree. Doris A.

Expand full comment

Fred: useful. Register more Democrats. https://www.fieldteam6.org/

Expand full comment
May 17, 2022·edited May 17, 2022

Registering more Democrats is comparatively easy. Getting those registered Democrats to vote is another issue. The vote is what really counts, not those that are register. Unlike the Republicans, there is a large percentage of registered Democrats that do not take the time to vote. I have been involved in local campaigns and elections and have seen this disparity. I have also noted that women vote in greater numbers than do men. The youth's vote is yet another issue. They must be encouraged to vote.

Expand full comment

Vote Forward enlists volunteers to write to registered Democrats who are unlikely to vote. I’ve been doing it for a while now. It’s pretty easy.

Expand full comment

Predicate to voting. Once they are registered they can vote. Laws of probability kick in.

We have their names etc.

Expand full comment

You are right on target, Elias. Here in California all of us can vote by mail at no cost and great convenience to ourselves. Yet too many Californians can't be bothered to do even that. Those who do not vote are the problem, not a solution.

Expand full comment

No he's not!

In order to win, we need to FLIP four Senate races in Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. We have to overcome voter preclusion, fear. We have millions of unregistered likely Democratic women in our database from these states, and we need to reach all of them to help them get registered and vote for pro-choice, pro-woman Democrats.

Expand full comment
founding

True for *this* election - but what about every other? (Isn't some measure of education needed for civic values to be inculcated, i.e. for people to understand the importance of their vote and how the consequences of voting affect their communities?)

Expand full comment

"The Center for American Progress recommends that no U.S. corporation with 5 percent or more of its stock under foreign ownership or 1 percent or more controlled by a single foreign owner be allowed to spend money to sway the outcomes of U.S. elections or ballot measures."

This will be a long process. The rot began with Citizens United, accelerated with the tax cuts of George W Bush (remember those?), which made corporations much wealthier, which allowed them to take advantage of Citizens United through ever increasing amounts of lobbying of Congress, which allowed, for example, Big Pharma to write, yes write, legislation allowing them to fix prices...indeed everything Adam Smith had warned against in Wealth of Nations, and why Smith invented progressive taxation, as a means of curbing the power of the wealthy..

So, restrictions of the lobbying power of foreign-owned corporations is a good start, but what about domestically owned corporations?

Tax cuts are the root of all (economic) evil. Biden's proposal for a wealth tax of 20% and an increase in corporate taxes is also good. Let's back him to the hilt....and meanwhile focus on getting out the vote in November, and in 2024.

Expand full comment

Sadly, I suspect that the restriction of "no U.S. corporation with 5 percent or more of its stock under foreign ownership or 1 percent or more controlled by a single foreign owner be allowed to spend money to sway the outcomes of U.S. elections or ballot measures" would be declared unconstitutional by the present Obscene Court.

Expand full comment

Ans, Stymie the court. Enforce 28 U.S. Code § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge

(a)Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

Expand full comment

Agreed, we have an amazing number of statutes that are NOT enforced. It is time all of us started obeying and enforcing those laws.

Expand full comment

Tim Baldwin ; On what basis? If these foreigners are not actually 'citizens' (united or not), how can allowing them to vote or even lobby be justified? How would blocking them from the vote be 'Unconstititional', when real actual citizens have limited voices: (money as speech).?

Expand full comment

That's why I'd recommend SEC regulations. Corporations are not democratic institutions. And they don't vote.

Expand full comment

The more we can visibly show the American people how and to who forgiven funds flow, and how that money is used to sway them to vote against those who support our values, and those out to destroy this country, the better we all will be!

Expand full comment

How does one “show” something to people who have chosen not to “see”?

Expand full comment

Ask every voter whether they want foreigners to run our government.

Expand full comment

I understand that statement. But looking at the breakdown of the last election it “appeared” that there were still a large number of Americans voting FOR what the schlock the gop “party” was passing out, as there were Americans who voted for Biden/Harris.

Expand full comment

Lucky for us more people 7 million more voted for Biden/Harris vs. TFG. I shudder to think of where we might be if TFG had been successful in his (still slowly ongoing) coup attempt. This is still a huge threat to our free elections and our democracy, or what's left of it.

Expand full comment

But Buden won significantly, no matter what lies still circulate and In spite of the laundry list of vote 'purging' and poll closings, and decreasing the number of hours for voting, and gerrymandering and everything else!

Expand full comment

So how much of our mainstream media is owned by these foreign influences? I rarely hear or read about these influences owning large portions of our big corporations. But plenty of harping on the dangerous immigrants on our borders,etc. The reporting is not balanced. Is it because of foreign influence?

Expand full comment

Elon Musk and Rupert Murdoch are dangerous immigrants.

Expand full comment

A business goal is to maximize profit for the stockholder (owners) with little or no concern for the country. This blind goal tells us that we must be vigilant as to what Corporate America and the wealthy are doing. Follow the money. The "LOVE of Money is the ROOT of ALL EVIL." In my humble opinion, this pandemic has demonstrated how much politician and businessmen love money. They consider businesses more important than the health and well-being of the employees and business customers.

Expand full comment

For most of its existence Fox was partly owned by a Saudi prince, Alwaleed Bin Talal, who gave up his shares during a Saudi investigation. Now Fox is owned by the Murdoch family via a family trust with 39.6% ownership share. U.S. Rupert Murdoch is chairman, while his son Lachlan Murdoch is executive chairman and CEO.

In 1985, Rupert became a naturalized US citizen, giving up his Australian citizenship, to satisfy a legal requirement for US television network ownership. Lachlan Murdoch, the Fox Corp. CEO and executive chairman, has departed Los Angeles and returned to Australia with his wife and children, according to three people with ties to the Murdoch family. Don't know whether he gave up his Australian or British citizenship.

Apparently from 1971 to 1985 Fox was controlled entirely by foreigners.

Disney owns the Fox sports channels.

It's difficult to tell who are other Fox investors. Murdoch has been married four times and has had six children in total and has political allies world wide. Do they hold shares?

Expand full comment

Thank you, Daniel. I knew Murdoch owned Fox and Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post. Both of these men are self centered narcissists and I believe Murdoch is a fascist. The English took offense to his 'mythporting' and booted him out. We should do the same.

Expand full comment

Crazy! No wonder we are having trouble and misinformation, and laws to regulate and limit are weakend, unenforced or nonexistent!

Expand full comment

Terry, (Indy) ; These foreign influences should not have ownership of our news media communications. People should not have to go to the BBC ( which is also suspect), to get truthful, reliable information, and not even be sure of those. No wonder the public is confused and disconnected. They watch 'dancing with the stars' while everything our people have fought for is being destroyed.

Expand full comment

Bingo! They only give you a little, but not the whole story, not the real culprits and not the root of the problems. This is by design.

Expand full comment

i didn't realise that foreign ownership of so-called american companies was so prevalent. so i guess that TFG wasn't lying -- not exactly -- when he claimed that foreign elements were voting in/influencing our elections. it's just that he substituted "illegal immigrants", which conjures up the vision in the public's mind of brown people sneaking across the southern border rather than all those obscenely rich corporations and their obscenely rich partners-in-crime making decisions that oppress the american people.

i know i am willing to make a lot of noise about this issue, and demand that democrats actually break out of their shell and DO SOMETHING about this, but ... and this is a big *but* ... will they actually do something to protect this country and its people when they too are beholden to this foreign money?

Expand full comment

The Republican Party often blames the powerless (Welfare Queens was a Reaganism) to distract the public from the GOP’s actual abuse of power at the big money end of the spectrum. So pointing the finger at the Southern Border with accusations of voter fraud is just another variation of the same old trick. That alone needs to be pointed out. But I don’t see the Democrats in a shell as much as blocked very strategically in the Senate as they have been for at least 13 years. I know the Democrats are supposed to have a majority but you know, the Manchin party has another idea. So yes they do need to make noise about this, but need to find a simple way to explain it so it fits into a sound bite that can be repeated over and over the way Trump repeats the same lies again and again.

Expand full comment

It should also be a crime that has severe consequences for a senator or representative to betray the folks who voted for them! What Manchin and Sinema have done should be illegal!!! It's totally against US.

Expand full comment

well, this manchin-party-of-one problem is overwhelmingly maddening. yet, i often wonder if the inability of the democrats to emulate the rethuglicans' ability to mobilise their mouthy minority (this is almost a trademark of the dems, who are described as ... ahem, excuse oft-repeated but earthy phraseology here ... a "party of pussies") is because the democrats are the party representing absolutely everyone else -- those who are not white male elites. as a scientist, i've often been told that trying to get scientists to all do a thing is like herding cats. are democrats trying to herd cats?

Expand full comment

Yes Democrats tend to respect individuality more than their authoritarian opposition so there are more opinions offered, an upside for humanity, a downside for political manipulation. They need a great PR firm to identify the policies and messages they agree on most, I think there are lots, and then dumb the topics down to repetitious sound bites the way Republicans do.

Expand full comment

Wende Reid ; Democrats are not in lockstep because they are truly tha party of Freedom! The only ones who did not get the memo are the ones being bought off by our enemies, and they don't count, because the are not true Democrats; they are impostors and traitors.

Expand full comment

We agree.

Expand full comment

Dumbing down are the key words here!

Expand full comment

GrrlScientist ; It looks like Democrats are trying to fight against big money with less money. Citizens United really tilted the playing field toward an advantage for wealth. The Repugs will go ANYWHERE for their loot! No matter how corrupt and barbaric. Also, take it easy on the 🐈 cats. They are independent and have 9 lives. I know some pretty fearsome 'pussies'.

Expand full comment
founding

@Laurie. The real cats are the Kool Kats working for the Democrats!

Expand full comment

Benjamin R. ; Nice caption!

Expand full comment

You are so right Wende Reid. We (the majority of Americans) MUST get out very small, repetitious sound bites. This (30 seconds) is all the attention span of the altRight. If we're to make any progress we have to use the same methods as the trumpsters.

Fay Reid

Expand full comment
founding

@GrrlScientist. The limit on individual contributions to a candidate or campaign is $2,900. Compare that number to the no limit donations that can be made by fictional persons and "for the purpose" entities created just for political purposes.

Expand full comment

GrrlScientist ; Very good question! How can we get anywhere when our representatives who are supposed to protect and even promote our best interests are bought up by our opponents or even enemies?

Expand full comment

There should be clear labeling of where a candidate or incumbent gets their money.

Expand full comment
founding

Hey Laurie, isn't it a problem that the very institution that we look to for regulation of campaign finance is made up of the exact same people who rely on that money for their jobs (re-election)?

Expand full comment

Remember Bernie Sanders statement : "It blows my mind how people keep voting for those who work against their interests" again and again."

Expand full comment

Ben ; Certainly is! We are in a challenging position. If we can get creative enough to call out some facts about our opponents ( with whom we are in a death struggle), so they can see what is really happening, we can win.

Expand full comment

well, as senator sheldon whitehouse so aptly observed on twitter a few hours ago regarding the SCOTUS ruling in FEC v. Cruz, this is a victory for rethuglicans & their right-wing donors to further their assault on the campaign finance system and is another step toward unlimited special-interest spending in our elections. when SCOTUS itself allows this, where can we go from here?

here's the tweet link (and you probably will want to read the entire thread)

https://twitter.com/SenWhitehouse/status/1526245574688878595

Expand full comment

Of course I agree. The present (rotten corrupt) Supreme Court decided the other day on a Cruz case that the more corruption the better. You can now use the campaign money as a loan for yourself. See that.

Expand full comment

Ellen Moody ; more corruption is discouraging. I wonder if Democrats can use this rule to advantage though? I think using campaign money as a loan for themselves has been a weapon against Democrats. Now they can use it legally.

Expand full comment

Nobody should be allowed to do it.

Expand full comment

Ellen Moody; True, but this is another example of how Democrats talk about fighting back, but hobble themselves with virtue while Repugs and their evil allies fight dirty.

Expand full comment

Sounds like a good start. The People of the party formerly known as Republican must be forced to look at the reality of what they are helping to create. The common Fox viewer has gotten away with willful ignorance in the name of getting the right-wing in power, knowing they won’t ever be again, in a true Democracy. That’s what at least 60% of the campaign ads should address, targeting the right. And this info should be the eye-opener for the left, as well.

Expand full comment

". . .and the beat goes on." Another article, another moment of disgust, and the beat goes on. Congress continues to make laws that favor private interest and not the public. I have been voting by mail for the last 9 years and have never had a ballot rejected. In the last 6 months I have had two rejected. What we are worried about has already happened! My plan now is to vote early and in person. I am retired and have the time to fight for my right to a vote, millions of others do not have the time. Their vote will be rejected and that will be the end of it. Laws are now bought and paid for with dollars, foreign and domestic. What we are worried about has already happened. The 2022 midterms will be a legal menagerie. You are right again, Dr Reich. And you still carry the curse of Cassandra.

Expand full comment

I all have to add is the time-tested notion; "I'll believe that corporations are people when Texas executes one"... this surely sounds like an idea whose time is way overdue.

Expand full comment

Professor, Last night, an MSNBC seemingly highly credible guest (I should have noted his name) unequivocally stated, after presenting a reasoned argument, that our choices this fall and, again, in 24 boil down to two mutually exclusive alternatives: White hegemony or pluralistic democracy. He added, “Everyone will have to choose a side.” Considering the interests of the foreign influences you cited, please advise, per the percentage thresholds you presented, how one organizes to influence Congress to limit said effects. I (and I imagine others) would welcome your thoughts, particularly since the impact of foreign influence receives virtually no coverage.

Expand full comment

I have often worried about 'multi-national' corporations and how they make contributions to political (usually right wing) parties. The phrase coined by Dwight Eisenhower ; "the military -industrial complex" underscores the threat. Our military can also be bought!? Very concerning.

Expand full comment

More divergent thinking, more intellectual judo like this is needed, to break through the idiotic framing they foist upon the world, through the mouths of overpaid and underbrained toadstools, who systematically erode the foundations of democracy at home, in their prurient puppet dance to princes of petroleum, abroad.

Expand full comment

David Beckwith (MrWondrous) What a handle! But very well said!

Expand full comment

Absolutely this should be an issue democratic candidates use.

Expand full comment

George Manos ; I agree, If we can get people to see this sell out and the damage it does to us,and continued peril and actual danger to Democracy, it would be a killer weapon, and also true Short, sweet and captioned !

Expand full comment

I think corporations shouldn't have any influence over elections at all, foreign or otherwise.

Expand full comment

I believe that it can be demonstrated that the people who will vote for change do have an effect. If citizenship is to mean anything, then the right to vote should be exercised. I whole heartedly believe that money is not speech and that therefore each person, rich or poor, should have the same weight at the ballot box. I would so like to see a restriction on the political speech of the wealthy no matter their country of origin. Out-sized influence of money and therefore "more speech" goes against the basic principle that all men are created equal. Citizenship should be a requirement to participate and those considered as citizens should be living individual persons, not corporations.

Expand full comment

Frank, I see your name in my inbox all the time. Great to see you here.

Expand full comment
May 17, 2022·edited May 17, 2022

I initially thought this was going to be about information warfare. The truth is, with a careful reading, the two are strongly linked. I once read that corporations were, effectively, sociopathic. Their allegiance to only money makes this so and your comment on Exxon substantiates this in a very big way. Justice Roberts and Citizens United. One has to just sit and shake ones head.

Vote! Organize! And keep the faith. These are the roots of yesterday's topic, hope. (This blog also helps.)

Expand full comment