Does Al Gore understand the corrupting influence of money on the political process?

[welshTerrier2]

Hillary just loves those lobbyists. Her apologists quickly point out that there are "good lobbyists" and "bad lobbyists". "Would you lefties really want to keep progressive interest groups from speaking out?" Well, no, actually, we wouldn't. What we would like to do is recognize the serious distortions of democracy that result from the mega-wealthy, corporately-funded, profit-seeking groups having greater access to power and greater influence on policy than the American people. Failing to address this critical distinction, when speaking about lobbyists, demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the corruption of our democracy we have today. It also demonstrates that, if elected, anyone holding those views would change absolutely nothing to restore power to the American people.

Here is what Mr. Gore so correctly observed on the subject of money and lobbying. His specific comments related to the lobbying of judges but he clearly demonstrates an understanding of the corrupting influence of wealth on our democracy:

source: The Assault on Reason p. 234-235

The classic problem facing advocates of a broad and effuse public interest who rely mainly on the force of argument and the rule of reason is that they simply do not have access to the same supplies of concentrated wealth that are often available to advocates of narrow special interests whose continued income is vitally affected by the decisions of the courts, the Congress and the executive branch.

Mr. Gore "gets it" on the role of money in our political processes. Some, whose dirty hands are stuck deep down into the pockets of the good old boys on K Street, would see such talk as "biting the hand that feeds them." Well, perhaps they would be right. Perhaps they should seek their sustenance from less corporate sources. If we keep voting for those who won't even speak out against the corruption, how can we possibly expect anything to ever change?

[Myrina]

1. ... I was wondering if your thread title was a rhetorical question ...

... I've got my answer. Thank you. :)

[Maat]

2. Good point (n/t).

[Uncle Joe]

3. Once again, Al Gore gets it.

Thanks for the thread welshTerrier.:thumbsup:

[welshTerrier2]

4. Uncle Joe, you promised me a great book

you spoke the truth ...

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

:toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast:

[Uncle Joe]

5. Thanks welshTerrier, I'm happy, you got as much out of it as I did!

:toast: :hi:

[AtomicKitten]

6. thank you for taking the time to digest Gore's book

It definitely is food for thought.

[welshTerrier2]

7. a piercing, explicit focus on democracy

the issue of democracy seems almost absent from the presidential campaign.

how can any Democrat running for office not make publically-financed campaigns the centerpiece of the reforms they seek?

Gore's entire book, while it covers almost every topic and every issue in some way, at its core, is a devastating look at how far off course we've allowed our government of, by and for the people to stray. The book's whole focus is on empowering the American people and restoring our government to its rightful owners. To ignore the centrality of that issue while running for office, in my view anyway, is unconscionable.

[AtomicKitten]

8. the current field strategy rings hollow

I think it would behoove the Dems to throw the olde tyme strategy and focus out the window and take a good look at the way things really are. I believe the failure to do that has caused a growing sense of unease and agitation regarding the current field of candidates.

Thanks much for bringing these issues to light. What I have learned at DU is to think bigger.

[welshTerrier2]

9. "the olde tyme strategy"

the "common wisdom" seems to be that the candidates would be taking a huge risk if they cut their ties to corporate money and support.

my view is that, if they were credible on the issue, the American people would overwhelmingly support their efforts. it has to be real; not contrived for political consumption. if they really ever went to bat for "we the people" and promised to fight as hard as they could to cast the evil ones out of the halls of our government, they might just secure generations of power for the Democratic party ...

playing it "safe", in my view anyway, will perhaps win an "anti-bush" election or two, but such complicity will not sustain them for long ...

[Blue Belle]

10. Have you got to the part where he wants to have Congress...

to hold televised sessions during evening "Prime Time" TV Hours? I thought that was a great idea.

It sounds like you are having the same reaction to Gore's book as I had. :)

[welshTerrier2]

11. don't remember that ...

good idea though ... i just read something about televising ALL Congressional committee hearings but I can't remember where I read it ...