« December 2009 | Main | February 2010 »

January 29, 2010

Reviving Accountability

In the ‘State of the Union’ speech, President Obama said he would name a bipartisan commission to guide the federal budget onto a sustainable path. The clear inference here is that the current path is unsustainable….and that a commission rather than our elected Congress would be able to have greater success in dealing with our federal debt and budget crisis. But decisions about the national debt and the federal budget aren’t just about spreadsheets and sound bites…they’re about public values. I first heard about this proposal before the speech on the Public Agenda page of Facebook…to say the least, I was disappointed. My response was: Hmmm...so because our elected officials are unwilling to do their jobs, we need a 'commission' to take their places in the really difficult decisions. I have some mixed feelings about this...how about holding our elected officials accountable instead?” After hearing the President, my opinion hasn’t changed.

Interestingly enough, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said recently in his ‘State of the State’ speech that he would most likely name a bipartisan commission to guide the state’s redistricting process. It was billed as a first, solid step to make California more governable: Take the drawing of legislative districts out of the hands of lawmakers, whose interests lie in keeping seats safe for their own party, and turn it over to a citizens' commission. The result would be more competitive elections, winnable by a Democrat or Republican, which in turn should encourage more moderates rather than ideologues to run. But as the time nears to redraw district lines after the 2010 Census, the state office implementing the plan has a serious problem that could threaten the commission's credibility. The pool of volunteers who have applied so far doesn't come close to reflecting California's diversity, not only in ethnicity but in age, gender and other ways. Oops! Maybe this isn’t such a great idea after all.

These are difficult times for all politicians…at all levels. More specifically, the era of easy political decisions is over. Many of our elected officials are running for cover…the others are in serious denial about the current status of their chosen profession. In politics these days, there are less and less places to hide. Tough decisions must be made. Certainly attempts are being made to shield politicians from their mandated responsibilities, but public scrutiny won’t relent anytime soon. If anything, I believe it’ll get stronger and more focused as politicians try to deflect their duties onto others who are simply appointed. Some will still try to hide behind partisan firewalls…others will try to hide behind ideology…others will hide behind the recommendations of commissions. No matter where our elected officials seek to hide…they need to find justice rather than relief.

I have to admit that I don’t particularly have a ‘watch-dog’ personality, but I’m glad some others do. My suspicion is that many of our politicians today…Democrats and Republicans…want to continue their petty, partisan bickering without any consequences. Many Democrats see it as pay-back or a new opportunity to advance progressive values, while many Republicans see it as their chance to regain power through passive resistance. We probably do need lots of ‘watch-dogs’ these days to keep tabs on many of our elected officials as they try to navigate an increasingly treacherous political climate without taking responsibility for anything.

I realize this sounds very cynical, but when ‘commissions’ are proposed in state and federal venues as the solutions to political gridlock I start to wonder where we draw the line with accountability. I might be wrong…but, I see these steps as an admission by the President and our Governor that our system of electoral accountability is broken. We need ‘commissions’ to do these jobs in order to revive some semblance of accountability in public policy decisions…after all, members of ‘commissions’ can do the tough political wrangling and then be thrown under the bus.

We need a renewed public conversation about responsibility, trust and accountability. At the heart of this conversation I believe we will find that each layer of public responsibility has unique challenges and opportunities…and has a unique role in reestablishing and protecting the public trust. Let’s talk about accountability as everyone’s ethical responsibility. Let’s talk about being trustworthy, rather than talking about trust as mere consumers. This is a big-picture meta-issue that will continue to sabotage our ability to take action on our most pressing public needs if we don’t face it…and soon.

January 22, 2010

Free Enterprise Trumps Democracy

The Supreme Court decided yesterday to give more power to lobbyists and interest groups in political campaigns. They ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections. By doing so, they single-handedly made all public conversations on the topic of campaign finance reform irrelevant. In a post last November…‘The Price Is Right’…I proposed that ‘we’ needed to decide whether our free enterprise system supports our democracy OR our democracy supports our free enterprise system. Yesterday, the Supreme Court chose the latter in a decision that will dramatically reshape our elections for years if not decades in the future. This decision clearly identifies business interests as our top priority…and it appears we have no recourse in opposition to it.

The balance between free enterprise and democracy comes down to the accumulation and distribution of power. Free enterprise focuses on the systematic accumulation of wealth…and with wealth comes power. In recent years with broad deregulation, mergers and acquisitions have accumulated greater and greater power in fewer and fewer corporations. In 2008 it was agreed by both Republicans and Democrats that some of these corporations had already accumulated power to the point where they were too big to let fail. Democracy, on the other hand, focuses on the distribution of power among all citizens. In politics, this distribution of power depends on an election process where citizens make their choices after weighing all the information they have available on the candidates. Information is critical for the survival of any democracy...that’s why this Supreme Court decision is so damaging. Large corporations already control media coverage of elections and now that they can dominate the advertising side of campaigns, clear and accurate information about candidates will be even harder to find as we try to sift through a mountain of incomplete information, false characterizations and downright lies.

Where are the tea-baggers when we need them? Aren’t they supposed to be actively identifying and resisting the accumulation of power in the hands of just a few that could endanger our personal freedoms and our democracy? What the tea-baggers don’t realize…or choose to disregard…is that the original tea party was a protest over taxes imposed on tea that was traded exclusively by a government-sanctioned for-profit corporation. It was as much a protest against the monopoly-hold the East India Company had on tea as it was a protest against the new tax. When tea-baggers extend their critical view to include all interests that have accumulated too much power for the country’s good, I might consider more conversations with them. The continued accumulation of power in the hands of just a few people is worrisome…and it will be accelerated by this Supreme Court decision.

I really hate to say it, but our democracy is threatened. The already tenuous balance between free enterprise and democracy has been tipped. Since 2010 is a mid-term election year, I believe we’ll see a huge increase in corporate-funded advertisements. Even more worrisome, you can expect corporate interests to frame the issues they feel are most important in ways that are intended to manipulate not only the process but also each candidate’s message. Yesterday’s Supreme Court decision was a game-changer…politicians now will need corporate endorsements, like NASCAR teams. Hang on…it’ll be an interesting ride!


Hosting by Yahoo!