Ending The Corporate Takeover of Politics: No Money For Taxes But Plenty For Donations?

We are going to continue with our series in examining the ongoing corruption of the American political system, which began with our March 28th article entitled  “Has the Season ofMAGA Finally Arrived? Democrats Struggle for Relevance”. I should point out that I’m hesitant to say “our” political system since, as most of our readers already know, it stopped being “our” political system many years ago. Certainly, since the 2010 Citizens United folly by the Supreme Court when it defaulted to Wall Street.

Any vestiges of a Republic “of, by, and for the people” as President Lincoln famously proclaimed, ceased at that point since it placed elections in the hands of the highest bidder and effectively removed any competition between Wall Street and unions, but between the wealthy elite  and ordinary citizens.

We’ve also taken a look at partisan gerrymandering and unlimited term limits which has virtually ensured that the two corporate owned parties---the Democrats and Republicans---maintain a lock of the system. Partisan gerrymandering as allowed them to redraw congressional districts to their advantage (and basically permitting them to “choose” their voters instead of the other way around).

Unlimited term limits gives them a virtual unhindered lock on their seat in Congress regardless of how low their approval rating is (the same can be said for federally appointed judges, including the Supreme Court). Approval ratings for Congress are often in the low 30% range (it’s been as low as 9%), and yet Congress still has a 97% reelection rate.

Can you imagine bombing every employee evaluation by your boss, consistently getting customer reviews, routinely going over budget, and keeping your job? How about even allowing you to decide on your own pay raises?  Well, in Congress you can.  

We also just covered allowing unequal ballot access. Both of the two corporate parties (which also happen to minority parties when it comes to voter registration) are free to write (and pass) legislation giving them the advantage at the ballot box and effectively restricting competition by making it inordinately harder to get on the ballot.

One tool used is requiring 10x more signatures on ballot application or limiting the timeframe to obtain the signatures, as well as indirectly collude with the media to keep them out of debates (especially at the federal level), limiting “equal time” public access, and the perpetual belittling of third party and Independent candidates.  

Finally, adding salt to the wound, is legislation mandating that all taxpayers pay for the primaries of the Democrats and Republicans, irrespective of their registration, but despite paying,  you aren’t permitted the opportunity to participate. Imagine going out to eat. But, before you can order, you’re required to buy two dinners for someone else, and you don’t have any say in it. Why? Because that’s the restaurant rules, which, by the way, were written by the people whose dinners you’re paying for.  Is that fair? Of course not! In politics, it’s called taxation without representation and that’s what you have in closed primary states.  

Now, let’s say you’re a registered member of the Libertarian or Green party (the third and fourth largest political parties respectively in the U.S.). Despite belonging to an official party,  you are still obligated to pay for the primary of the Democrat and Republican parties. However, nothing goes to your party. Not a dime.

In fact, to keep your party going, you have to pay out of pocket if you want to support it.  Finally, if you’re a registered Independent (the nation’s largest political bloc), you face the same problem.  Not only are you prohibited from participating, you are being forced to financially support  your political opponents!  

So, we’ve obviously covered quite a bit since the kickoff on our political system corruption series. So, let’s take a look at another topic near and dear to our hearts----taxes (sarcasm intended). Actually, we’re going to look at corporate taxes and how it impacts politics.

Everyone is familiar with Tesla, thanks to Elon Musk, the current head of DOGE—the Department of Government Efficiency---whose job is to snoop around and file government “bad actors” and financial malfeasance of taxpayer’s money. But did you know that Tesla, which is valued at $41 trillion dollars, reported earning $2.3 billion dollars in 2024, paid zero dollars in federal taxes? That’s right. Nada.   As an aside, the average American family pays roughly 14% of their income on taxes.

Over the past three years, the auto manufacturer earned  $10.8 billion dollars and yet managed to pay just $48 million in federal taxes. That works out to be a corporate tax rate of 0.4% (the statutory corporate tax rate is 21%). But it was more than just clever accounting involved. Congress actually passed legislation giving Tesla a tax break which saved them some $2.4 billion dollars.

Meanwhile, according to CBS, Elon Musk donated $277 million dollars to the Trump campaign in 2024 through his political action committee, “America PAC”.  He also donated $10 million to the Senate Leadership Fund, which backs Republican Senators. He also gave $3 million dollars to MAHA Alliance PAC, which is associated with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.  I’d say that’s not a bad return on his investment.

In addition, 3M and Airbnb paid zero federal income taxes in 2024. Cisco, a high technology specializing in AI infrastructure, and networking company (reputedly also the second most valuable company in America) paid nothing in federal taxes either despite $2.7 billion dollars in profit in 2024. In fact, 10% of the S&P 500 companies paid nothing in federal taxes.

Top executives at Cisco contributed $2,301,092 to candidates, political action committees and other political organizations in 2024. The candidate who got the most was Kamala Harris. She received $588,525 while $63, 977 went to Donald Trump.  The DNC Services Corporation received the second largest amount at $244,261.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee got $62,543 while the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee picked up $50,973 in donations. The National  Republican Senatorial Committee was given $42,947 (it should be noted that between this and Trump, all other leading donations went to Democratic candidates or causes)

Cisco lobbying ranks 197^th out of 9,200 company’s who employ lobbying firms. Their lobbyists spent $3,270,000 in 2024, which is up from 2023’s $2,790,000. 32 of their 43 lobbyists were previously government employees. That’s 74.42%. In 2023, they employed 34 lobbyists. 84.29% were former government employees (elected, appointed, or hired).  

When it comes to donations from 3M, the same hold true about top executives donating. 64.40% of all donations went to Democratic candidates, organizations, or causes. Republicans got 35.60%. Interestingly, 74.86% of incumbents were supported compared to just 25.14% of challengers. Kamala Harris was the top dollar among candidate, picking up 105,639 dollars.  Donald Trump received just over $21,000 while the conservative oriented “Never Back Down, Inc” received $150,000 in donations.

Airbnb’s top executive donors gave Kamala Harris the most. $224,995 went to her campaign with only Maryland’s Future, a conservative outfit, picking any money for the right of center crowd. They received $25,000. Of note, $43,050 went to the Libertarian Party’s National Committee . 93.92% of all donations went to candidates compared to just 6.08% that went to political action committees.

As an aside, Airbnb co-founder, Joe Gebbia, joined Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (“DOGE”), which is headed by Elon Musk.  Gebbia stepped down from his executive role at Airbnb in 2022 but remains active on the board of directors. 

In terms of lobbying, Airbnb spent $940,000 in 2024, which is down from $1,030,000 in 2023. They employed 22 lobbyists in 2024, of which 68.19% held government jobs previously (elected, appointed, or hired).

General Electric earned close to $7 billion dollars in 2023 and not only didn’t pay any federal taxes, they actually got a refund of $423 million dollars! T-Mobile paid 0.4% in federal taxes yet bought back $13 billion dollars of its own stock back in 2023, giving its shareholders a hefty profit on their investment.

Top executives at GE gave Kamala Harris $159, 351. Trump received $43,987. The DNC Services Corporation got $43,342 while the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee picked up $32,369. The National Republican Senatorial Committee got $20,527. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee took in $19,931 in donations from GE executives.

The overall total donated for the 2024 election cycle was $1,139,136. GE lobbyists “invested” $3.570,000 in 2024. 44 of their 68 lobbyists (64.71%) previously held a government job as note above.  In 2023, it was 71.23% of the 73 lobbyists they employed.

Meta (which owns Facebook) spent $20 billion dollars on stock buyback in 2023, which was four times more than they paid in federal taxes. General Motors spent $11 billion dollars on stock buybacks, which was 40 times more than they paid in federal taxes.

In 2024, Meta spent $24.4 million on lobbying efforts while key executives at Meta donated over $5.5 million to candidates, PACs, and other organizations. Kamala Harris received the most at $1,657,461.  It’s worth mentioning that 53 of their 65 lobbyists previously held government jobs. That’s 81.54%.

These are just a smattering of companies who pay little or no federal taxes. JP Morgan Chase for instance had an effective federal tax rate of 5.9% in 2021 despite earnings of $48 billion. Microsoft ‘s effective tax rate was 9.7 although its earning were $33.7 billion. Chevron’s was 1.8% but earned profits of $9.5 billion, and the list goes on.  

Of course, they take full advantage of whatever deductions are available based on existing federal laws, and who can blame them? However, it is noteworthy that many of key officers for these corporations have also made substantial political contributions. In addition, many of their top executives have received compensation greater than the amount of federal tax their corporation pays.

What can we do? Frankly nothing as long as Citizens United remains in place. However, Congress could mandate a minimum tax based on anticipated profits by independent auditors. They could also direct that no donations can be made to candidates who have a direct relationship with their industry or that all donations over $5000 per person must be directed to a blind trust, to be dispersed by the party along with a percentage to be donated to a fund available to third party and Independent candidates.

Additionally, the cap of $3,500 an individual can donate per campaign should be eliminated. Afterall, people should be entitled to the same “free speech” as corporations, who are nothing but legal fictions. Of course, partisan gerrymandering must end, and term limits must be imposed. Lobbyists should no longer write legislation and all interaction between election or appointed officials, their staff, and lobbyists should be transparent and made public. 

Rank choice voting would also be a good step for more fair elections as would equal ballot access. Lastly, parties should be responsible for funding their own primaries. Until then, the corporate takeover of  elections will continue.

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Elon Musk spent $277 million to back Trump and Republicancandidates

Telsa Reported Zero Federal Income Taxes on $2 Billion ofU.S. Income in 2024

Big Corporations Paid Shockingly Little Taxes Last Year

 

Nearly 10% Of S&P 500 Companies Paid No Tax----Including Telsa

FEC: Contribution Limits

These 19 Fortune 100 Companies Paid next To Nothing---or Nothing at All---in Taxes in 2021

Who Pays and Doesn’t Pay Federal Income Taxes in the U.S.?

 

 

 

How companies like Amazon, Nike, and FedEx avoid paying federaltaxes

 

Ways to Manage the Political Deceit in America

It's no great secret that the two corporate owned political parties, the Democrats and Republicans, are minority parties, with the Democrats only slightly larger than the Republicans. The largest political bloc in America are the Independents. As of the end of October 2021, Democrats and Republicans were tied at 26% each while Independents had 44% of registered voters. 

However, the media, which is owned by some of the same corporations which own the Democrat and Republican parties try their best to suppress that little nugget of information and act as if there are only two parties to choice from and everyone else is are either nut cases or don't count.

Both parties do their level best to keep Independent and third parties out of the political process by creating numerous barriers such as blocking them from participating in debates (especially televised), imposing unrealistic signatures requirements of petitions to get on the ballot, and preventing them from obtaining access to big money donors to name just a few.

Independents and third parties are often bypassed when it comes to political appointments to boards, commissions, and  offices. They aren't even represented on Boards of Elections. They are typically just lumped in with which party has the fewest registered voters in a particular county.  

But are we really surprised? After all, it's not about representation of us anymore. It's about power and control. Besides, our Founding Father's warned us against political parties. They felt they would devolve into special interest cliques run by a handful of powerful individuals or groups, depriving citizens of their influence over government.

Oddly, it's little wonder that many of the descendents of the Founding Fathers actually approved of the Confederate Republic (not that they agreed or disagreed over the slavery issue). The reason was that the Confederate Government operated with a generally weak central government and much of the power retained by the states.

In addition, under the Confederate Republic, there were no political parties (although there were small ad hoc cliques which would form and dissolve over various issues). If you want to know more about how the Confederate Government was structured and functioned, you might want to check out "The Confederate Republic: A Revolution Against Politics" by George C. Rable.

Without political parties  it also meant that regardless of who won, everyone was represented since there was no partisan loyalty to adhere to. No dogma to blindly follow. Under out current "winner-take-all" system, those whose party wins are represented while those on the losing end are not. Plus the more people involved in the political process the harder it is to corrupt, especially if they're non-partisan.

Perhaps that's why all the other democracies in the world are based on the English parliamentary system in which everyone is represented on a percentage basis so even if your party loses, you still have representation.

Those descendents of the Founding Fathers thought that the design of the Confederate Republic was more like what the Founders had in mind. Besides, after the Civil War ended in 1865, the Federal Government quickly begun to acquire more and more power and control while the states became increasingly more beholden to Washington.

Today's two main parties represent corporate interests, despite their well orchestrated propaganda to the contrary which is designed to give us the illusion of choice.  If we received any benefit, it's usually an accidental byproduct of some compromise between competing corporate interests. But it doesn't have to be that way. While it may not seem or feel like it, we do still have some power left (at least for the moment).

There are things we can do such as demand term limits of no more than 12 years. If refused, we can impose our own defacto "term limits" by voting against incumbents who've held office for more than 12 years. We can also start voting for Independents and third party candidates, especially at the state and local levels.

Additionally, we can demand that our federal and state election officials along with key legislators institute a fair and level election playing field. No more defacto rigged elections by requiring Democrat of Republican candidates three or six signatures to get on the ballot while making Independents and third party candidates get one hundred or thousands at the federal level, not to mention jumping through all sorts of legal hoops (designed jointly by lawyers of both parties) to qualify separately in each and every state.  

Along with term limits, we could implement Rank Choice Voting which lets voters rank candidates by preference (party membership can also be removed too), which eliminates the need for partisan primaries. The top candidate wins. In case of a tie, there can be a run off.

Also key to restoring fairness in our elections is putting an end to partisan gerrymandering. Gerrymandering basically allows the two parties to draw districts in a way in which they get most of the registered voters for their party instead of drawing around natural boundaries or keeping neighborhoods and communities intact. Essentially, the parties select their voters. Redrawing districts could be done by a local university. To avoid partiality, there could be a rotating series of colleges and universities used.

Citizens should also have the right to put issues directly on the ballot without going through partisan gatekeepers. Where I live, in Kentucky, we are only allow to submit a petition to the legislature for their approval, which, if granted, will be put on the ballot with any changes as they see fit. Basically, we have to seek their permission.

Along the same lines, voters should have the final say on any tax, rate, fee, or elected official salary increases. Politicians are nefarious when it comes to our money. Only the threat of a "no" vote will keep them honest enough to submit a increase proposal that's truly needed.

We need to remember too that corporations, through their lobbyists, write most legislation. They fund both the candidates and the parties while we have no input in the writing of laws or citizen based lobbyist organizations representing us. That's why the voters should have a right to introduce initiatives directly onto the ballot (after review by either the county attorney or state Attorney General to ensure the proper legal wording and that no laws are being violated). It's also why voters should have the last say on any increases.  All lobbyist involvement should be an open record without exception.

Finally, and without a doubt, the most important issue that must happen if we are to reclaim our power over government is to get corporate money out of politics. Perhaps the worst thing that has happened in politics was the approval of Citizens United by an uninformed Supreme Court. Citizens United affirmed that corporations are, in some magical way, "people" and thus not just "entitled" to the same rights as you and me, but when it comes to money (which was erroneously equated with "free speech").

The High Court said corporations could donate whatever they wanted. No more caps. meanwhile, you and I are still limited, not that we could compete with corporations anyway. Not even unions can match corporate donations (for every dollar a union donates, corporations donate a minimum of five).  At the same time, Independents and third parties are locked out.

That's because we are a Corporatocracy, which is a de facto merger or close partnership between Big Business and government. As an aside, a Corporatocracy does not, as you may have guessed, have anything to do with "socialism" unless you mean "corporate socialism". A Corporatocracy is managed by a small group of the very wealthy commonly called an Oligarchy though a Kleptocracy or other terms are sometimes used.

A Corporatocracy is a neo-fascist entity which, like any form of fascism, borrows from the Left and Right based on a country's history, traditions, and values.  It's why the fascism of Nazi Germany was different from that of Spain, which differed from Argentina's which differed from Italy's, which differed again from Hungary or Romania.

It will play groups---race, gender, class, religion, ideology, and so on--- off of each other while trying to create as many divisions as possible in what's called "Identity Politics". In 1939 it was the Jews and Roma gypsies who were the designed scapegoats. Today it seems to be whites and Asians. The more divided society is the easier it is to control and manipulate. 

It may even promote violence from behind the scenes to create chaos and raise the level of civil frustration with the state of affairs, and as way to vent aggression until it's ready to exploit it. It will manufacture wars for its own economic gain behind a mask of freedom, liberty, and patriotism.

A Corporatocracy will act incrementally to avoid attracting undo attention by the public, but, like water pushing against a dam or wall, it will push everywhere simultaneously looking for a weak or soft spot. It may even retract now and again, only to advance somewhere else.  Meanwhile, this neo-fascist state will attempt to demonize whatever it fears, and what it fears the most is whatever can replace it or take its power and control away. Remember that. In today's world, it's important.

As an aside, the media is part and parcel of the Corporatocracy. It serves as the "propaganda wing". 96+% of all media outlets---TV, internet content, movies, video games, magazines, books, newspapers, the news in all its forms, etc.---are owned by just six corporations. They set the agenda and the slant. They decide what and how we see or hear what we do. They manipulate our perceptions.  When they do "endorsements", they are openly trying to influence your vote. 

Personally, I don't think the media should "endorse" anyone. It's not their job. That's being biased. The news is about facts, not opinions or innuendos. I was (and remain) blacklisted by a one trick pony newspaper for exposing the endorsement process.  What we want is the unvarnished facts. Tell us where they stand on various issues. We can make our own decisions from there.

If any of this looks or sounds familiar, it's because it is and it's by no coincidence. It's been repeated and refined down through history. There are things we can do as I've outlined above. But it will only happen if we put aside all the petty divisions which we've been manipulated into believing. It will also only happen if we come together and focus solely on the "man behind the curtain" to borrow from Dorothy in Oz.

Alternatively, we can pretend all these divisions are real and continue to be divided further and further apart until only a fuehrer like individual can put us back together again...in his or its image. It's happened before, often starting out with the best of intentions but it never ends well. Never.  So, what do you want to do? Which path do you want to go down?   

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider subscribing. It's free!

 

FairVote: How RCV Works

Initiatives and referendums in the United States

How Congress can stop gerrymandering: Deny seats to statesthat still do it

Ending Gerrymandering

 

Gallup: Party Affiliation

 

 

Turning Out the Turnout: How America Stacks Up in Voting

We just wrapped up a three part series on where America ranks in terms of overall freedom, income inequality and healthcare, and education. Despite the hype of being the "Leader of the Free World", we actually are pretty far down the pole. In fact, as many of you know, America is on the low end of the industrialized West and in some areas, actually among second tier nations. Not good folks. Not good at all. So, I was thinking "why don't we do something about that?". Our Founding Fathers gave us two options to change our government. The first was the ballot box. The second was the ammo box. Obviously, we'd prefer the former to the latter but that depends on the options the government gives us.
As a result, I wanted to know where America ranks in terms of voting. After all, isn't voting the hallmark of a democracy or democratic Republic? Of course, we're now a Oligarchy with a professional political ruling class comprised of plutocrats, but how has that affected our ability to influence government?

According to 2018 Pew Research study, the nation with the highest voter turnout is Belgium with a turnout of between 83% and 95% and it's been that over the last 40 years. That's pretty impressive! Next on the list is Sweden with just over 85% of registered voters showing up at the polls. Following Sweden was Denmark with a little over 80% of the voting age population voting. In fourth place was the nation down under, Australia, which had almost 79% of its voting age population coming out to vote. South Korea rounded out the top five with just under 79% of its voting age citizens voting. Other countries in the top 20 include Norway (70%), France (78%), Mexico (66%), UK (63%), and Greece (62%).

So, if the US---the "Leader of the Free World"---isn't in the top 20 in voter turnout, just where are we ranked? The US is in 26th place, behind nations like Estonia and Spain and just ahead of Slovenia, Chile, and Poland. According the study, just 55.70% of the voting age population bothers to vote. That's just slightly over half of the population. But the good news is that according to another Pew study, this time from 2013, the US ranked 31st out of 34 countries. In 2018, we were 26 out of 34 industrially developed nations. I can hear chants of "USA USA USA" now!

As a nation, we pretty much stink when it comes to showing up at the polls. But, then there's not much to vote for when you're an Oligarchy right? After all, they literally own both parties and their politicians. It also means they control policy but, at least according to Citizens United and people like Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), money is free speech. Of course, corporations are allowed far more " free speech" than flesh and blood citizens and that means more access and control; even to the point of writing or co-writing legislation. They fund campaigns and fill party coffers on both sides of the aisle. Partisan politics is really about which corporate clique gets what they want and who gets the crumbs. Naturally you and I get stuck with the bill.

Well, if we're so dismal when compared to the rest of the world, how do we stack up against each other? According to several reports, the most recent data (from 2016) shows that in 10th place, the highest voter turnout was Louisiana, which by the way, has the third highest poverty rate in the US. In 9th place was Mississippi. Voter turnout out was 67%. The 8th place winner was Massachusetts with a 68% turnout. The 7th spot went to Nebraska which had a voter turnout of 68%. Coming in 6th place was Oregon with 69%.

The state making it into the 5th spot was Iowa with 69.6%. 4th place went to New Hampshire, but not by much! It's voter turnout was 69.8%! The 3rd place winner was Maine with a 70.8% voter turnout. The "bridesmaid" state at number two was Wisconsin which had a impressive 73% voter turnout. Finally, the state with the highest voter turnout was Minnesota! Minnesota has a amazing turnout of 74.5%! That's nearly three in four voters who showed up to vote. That's outstanding by any measure. In case you're interested, out of the top ten, seven of the states went Democrat while only three went Republican.

Now that we looked at the ten best, who were the ten worse? What ten states cared the least about showing up to vote? In the 10th spot was the Peachtree state of Georgia. It's voter turnout was 59.3%. In 9th place was New York with 59.2%. The 8th place spot belonged to Arizona, which had 58.4%. 7th place went to Oklahoma. They had a voter turnout of 58.3%. Coming in 6th was Nevada with only 57.7% showing up to vote.

Now we get into the top five, which brings us to Texas. You would think their voter turnout would have put them on the other list, but nope. Texas had a voter turnout of just 55.3%. Well, at least Texas wasn't Tennessee which came in 4th place with a voter turnout of only 54.9%. In 3rd place is Arkansas which had a turnout of 54.3%. The runner up for the worse of the worse in voter turnout belongs to West Virginia. West Virginia had only 52.9%. Yikes! Finally, in first (or last) place, depending on how you look at it was Hawaii. The 50th state showed up with only half its population bothering to voter---50% exactly. Seven of the bottom ten tend to vote Republican by the way. I don't know if I should offer my congratulations or condolences.

Some other entries include Delaware in 12th place with a 66.6% turnout, Michigan in 15th place with 66.1%, Alaska in the 20th spot with 64.6%, Ohio at 25 with 63.5% turnout, Florida making the 32nd spot with 62.2%, Kentucky in 36th place with 61.1% voting, California came in 38th with 60.3%, Indiana was 40th with 59.5%. An interesting aside is that for the majority of the states, it's the older voters who tend to come out consistently. Younger voters (mostly the Millennials) tend to stay away, but they seem to also be the most vocal when it comes to politics. Guess it want to change things you have to stop bellyaching and actually show up. Just saying you know. Women are also more likely to vote than men. I guess they took that 19th Amendment pretty seriously! They certainly fought long and hard for it.

So what does this tell us? Well, it seems to go hand-in-hand with the results of our other results in that the rhetoric of the US being the world leader in democracy doesn't match the reality of where American actually stands. It also shows the frustration that Americans feel toward politics. Most Americans are turned off by all the childish and petty playground drama which seems to define not just Washington but state capitals and local city halls. Of course, we already know the distain from Washington is reciprocated to us out here in "flyover country". They don't even pretend to listen to us anymore. Hell, they don't even have the decency to lie to us anymore. Have you noticed how many tied elections we've had recently? How many contested elections? How the fact that the 2016 Democratic Primary was fixed and nothing actually happened!? They just do as they please and leave it to the corporate controlled media to spin it however they want.

We can, of course, change this...if we really want to. Washington and others want us to believe they have the power and control. They don't. We do. Unlike countries like the UK where the government simply ignores the decision of the voters (such as with Brexit) and the voters have little recourse, we have options. Americans need to demand term limits and an end to partisan gerrymandering of districts. We can demand a level playing field, and that includes third parties and Independents, who also just so happen to be America's largest voting bloc, and this includes opening up debates and equal access to the media. We also need to remove corporate money from politics which all but eliminates other groups and individuals from having a voice. That, of course, means dropping "Citizens United". As an aside, we can all start supporting and voting for non-lawyers and corporate VIPs like teachers, police officers, firefighters, blue collar workers, small business owners, and so forth; in other words, we can start electing individuals who are like us rather than millionaires and other elites.

It's up to you. We have the power and the ballot box remains...at least for the moment...our best option. However, if we're to preserve what's left of our Republic (which isn't very much as the numbers have repeatedly shown us), then we must act now. We can't wait and there won't be a second chance.



US voter trails most developed countries in voter turnout


Americans Don't Show Up at the Polls But Neither Do the Swiss


States With the Highest (and Lowest) Voter Turnout

Exposing More Political Dirty Tricks in Kentucky and Elsewhere

Apparently many of you have expressed interest in some of the more seemly ordinary everyday type of corruption which goes on at the campaign level. While I'm not sure why, perhaps because it's proximity and happens all around you, or if it's because of just how brazen it often it. Nevertheless, I will oblige your curiosity with some other examples that I'm aware of.

We've thus far discussed simple things like stealing yard signs, either outright or having the opposing camps (perhaps their supporters) place "bounties" on the signs. We've also talked about phony baloney newspaper and other types of endorsements, the use of "ringers" to draw votes away from the other side. We've also briefly ventured the area of vote buying, be it with cold cash or by willing voters a chicken dinner (which is oh so Kentucky). Of course, as in the old days, vote buying also consists of giving the voting accomplice liquor in exchange for their vote (or more accurately, votes) or hard cash.

As everyone knows, certain establishments are closed while the voting polls are open; establishments like liquor stores, bars, strip clubs, and so forth. One technique that used to be popular, and I'm sure remains so, is to go down to the local skid row and find a few willing volunteers who are willing to go vote in exchange for a pint of liquor (or these days, perhaps some other substance if it can be easily obtained). This technique works well where voter ID isn't used since the party hack has easy access to voter rolls and can tell by looking at the voter frequency just how often someone votes (often call "fidelity voting").

Since people's gender and age are also given, it's a simple matter of matching up your volunteer with, say three or four profiles, and take them around to the appropriate polling place. All the individual really needs to do is remember the name and address. After accomplishing their mission, it's just a matter of dropping them off and paying up. Sounds simple doesn't it? The volunteer isn't going to say anything. They got their booze. They're happy, and besides, vote buying is illegal. Vote buying is considered to be technically a "bribe", and can carry a fine of $10,000 and/or up to five years in jail. Obviously the reward doesn't justify the risk, but some will still try it.

One of the biggest curtailments to vote buying these days is voter ID. While some groups poo-poo the notion of showing a photo ID, claiming it causes some "undo" hardship on the voter, especially if they're a minority, the fact is that it doesn't. Nearly everyone has some form of photo ID these days, and if they don't (such people with no driver's license), a photo ID can still be easily obtained . In Kentucky, all you need is a social security card, a copy of your birth certificate, and a piece of postmarked mail with your address on it along with $12.00. The cards can be obtained at any of the County Clerks' Offices. Doesn't sound real difficult does it?

A similar, and perhaps more common form of voter fraud is as easy as taking a walk to the local cemetery. Seriously. While long considered to be something of a urban legend, the dead often find themselves remaining on voter rolls long after their death, while someone else shows up to vote in their name. Again, this is most common in places where a voter ID isn't required and where voter registries aren't regularly purged so that someone recently deceased, even five or eight years ago, remains on the voter registry. One of the most infamous cases of the dead voting is Lyndon Johnson's first senate race in 1948 in which approximately 202 dead Mexican-Americans voted at the last minute in Jim Wells County Texas. Oh, and they voted in alphabetical order! As an aside, it does seems that the dead tend to prefer Democrat candidates. Don't know why.

Another neat feature about requiring voter ID is that it cuts down on non-citizens from illegally voting, which is becoming a serious problem in a number of states which have large numbers of illegal immigrants. However, despite federal laws to the contrary, only 24 states are actually compliant with voting laws. Nevertheless, another disturbing trend is that some states and cities have started to allow illegal immigrants to vote in certain elections as part of their so-called "sanctuary" status. Personally, I think any state or locale which allows allow illegals to vote or for that matter, claims a "sanctuary" status and all that entails should forfeit any federal monies it receives.

Another "dirty trick" which is gaining in popularity is the good ole computer virus. Today every candidate has a web page. It's a common as having a palm card to pass out. However, websites can be easily disrupted several ways. First is the computer virus. One candidate I know had a very successful web page which was generating a lot of hits. So, a computer virus was sent to their website, hidden in a email as they usually are. Fortunately, this individual was able to detect it before opening and allowing the web page, which can cost several hundred dollars to create, to be destroyed. The candidate filed a complaint with the local party chairperson, but since this was a primary, the chairperson refused to get involved (except for the pleas not to release the incident to the local media in exchange for a promise to "investigate", which of course never happened). Apparently anything goes in primaries as Bernie Sanders recently discovered.

A similar trick is to try and overload the website with fake messages. Since every candidate wants to answer their email, a new trick is to get 10 or 15 individuals to send worthless emails demanding that the candidate personally respond. These individuals use different email addresses to make it look like there's more people than there really is. By keeping the candidate busy answering emails, it keeps them off the campaign trail. It can also create a situation where something the candidate writes can be used out of context, which often happens with speeches as we've all seen from TV commercials. Along the same lines, is trying to overload a candidates phone system in the same way.

However, if the opponent gets out on the campaign trail and starts out walking and knocking you, there is another common little trick which gets used a lot called "Pigeon-holding" (not "pigeonholing"). As a rule, a candidate has about 10 seconds from the time a prospective voter answers the door to make their pitch. After that, the average person tunes the candidate off and shuts the door. However, with pigeon-holding, the prospective voter is usually a friend or supporter of the opponent. Instead of letting the candidate make their 10 second spiel, they will keep asking questions. Of course, after usually getting a lot of doors slammed in their face, the candidate is delighted to have someone's full attention, except that it's a ruse.

Candidates deal in volume work. The more doors they knock on, the better the chances of getting votes. However, when they're pigeon-holed, they are kept in one spot for as long as possible, thus cutting down on the voters they meet. That usually helps their opponents who get the opportunity to knock on more door while their opponent is tied up. A variation on this trick is to also request signs, which candidates love to do since it shows support...and then "lose" the sign. They then contact the candidate or their headquarters and request another sign or two which of course also gets "misplaced", "stolen", or "destroyed" (usually they go out with the trash or are hidden behind the house or in the garage).

This will go on until the candidate or their staff gets wise to the ploy, but meanwhile they've cost the candidate money (remember, signs cost money) and time in delivering the signs (if you factor in the cost of assembling the signs---usually delivered in lots of 500 to 2000---as well as the costs of gas, the average yard sign cost about $5.00 each, and upward to $20 for the larger signs). As I previously mentioned, a certain candidate I know discovered that their signs---regular yard signs and the larger 3x5 signs were being stolen on a regular basis. They later learned that a public employee associated with the school system was paying students to steal the signs; $1.00 for the small signs and $5.00 for the bigger ones, plus $1.00 for each of the metal posts used to hold the 3x5 signs. That just breaks all sort of laws doesn't it? Then too, what moralistic lesson does that teach the students? By the way, most of the students involved were supposedly in Junior High School.

I have no doubt that these sorts of juvenile games are commonplace in just about every state, county, and burgh in the US. However do they really work? Actually, no. It's true that signs are a visible symbol of support and seeing a lot of signs for one particular candidate can be impressive, the fact is that signs don't vote nor do they necessarily persuade others to vote for that person. If someone has agreed to support you, stealing or defacing a yard sign won't change their mind. It will, however, tick them off and they will tell their neighbors and friends. Perhaps the most overlooked component to any campaign is word of mouth. People naturally tend to believe and trust what family and friends...and neighbors say about candidates, especially when one is believed to be trying to cheat or be underhanded. However, what yard signs do is reinforce name recognition which is important since that's all lesser informed many people seem to remember about the candidates.

Lastly (for this issue) is the ever popular rumor mill. Everyone who went through grade school knows the damage rumors can cause to someone's reputation. In fact, rumors tend to continue through school and sometimes even into one's place of employment (where it's given a thin veneer of respectability by being called the "gossip mill" or "grapevine"). Regardless, it largely the same. In politics, especially during elections it still happens except that it's often more subtle but every bit as vicious. Political rumors can be started in a infinite variety of ways, from "insider" leaks to the news media to little innuendos while talking to voters at the door or in a group. Sometimes they're in the form of a mailer or a radio or television spot (or even on the Internet).

Rumors are often hard to respond to since by the time you hear about them, they've been out there awhile. Therefore, some candidates strike first by putting out disclaimers up front and apologizing on behalf of their opponent for the lies that will likely be spread about them. Another example is a candidate who knew that their opponent had been lying about their record, took the unusual step of doing a side by side comparison of backgrounds---education, political or community, military and professional experience, and using both their opponent's own literature and public records. It caused quite a loud outcry from the opponent's camps. Not because it was untrue, but because the comparison made their candidate look bad!

However, while that's a positive example of dealing with rumors, most aren't so positive. Many rumors, founded or not, were floated around in Kentucky regarding an individual's alleged sexual orientation, despite being married with children (it was a "cover" so the rumor went). In fact, this happened to a few candidates who subsequently either lost or decided not to run. In New York this is what happened in a race between Ed Koch and Mario Cuomo in 1977 ("Cuomo not the homo"). Koch won by the way. Women often face far worse. From everything about their sexual orientation to being poor mothers or wives, to making sexual deals for campaign endorsements or contributions. However, it's been my experience that women can be far tougher than men when it comes to these sort of things. Perhaps it's because women have had a far more difficult time in the workplace than men and have had to endure more and work harder for the same respect (and money) given to men.

One way to help stave off some of these rumors is to be pro-active. By that I mean requesting a police background check and even requesting the FBI do the same thing. This provides added, and impartial, information to refute most claims. An employer reference, as well as references from respected community leaders (especially those who don't have anything to gain or lose with your election) are great. Another suggestion is having a generic rebuttal letter, radio, or television spot ready to go in an instant. Also, have a generic press release ready to go as well. That allows the candidate to get out in front of the issue before it gets out of hand, and buys time to prepare a more specific response.

Well, there you go. A few more examples of the corruption of the political system at its most basic level---the campaign. However, unfortunately corruption in politics has literally become institutionalized at the highest levels. When corporations are freely able to spend what they want to get the legislation they desire or to hire lobbyists to help write specific legislation, then you know it's gone too far. When there was more turn over in the old Soviet Politburo during the height of the USSR than in the present day US Congress, you know it has gone too far. When Congress has become a millionaires club and the average citizen is unable to afford to run for office, then you know it's gone too far. When the revolving door between government and the corporate world spins at such as dizzying speed that you can't tell the two apart, then you know it has gone too far. It's up to us to stop it.


Vote Buying Law and Legal Definition

Noncitizens, Voting Violations, and Elections

The DNC In Federal Court Admits It Rigged Its Primary For Hillary

Bluegrass and Green Dollars: Corruption in Kentucky Politics

As readers of Another Opinion know, I've been writing a lot lately about the influence of money in politics. I've covered the biggest donors by industry, the military contractors, and the biggest names in the buying and selling of Congress game that we call "democracy" (in truth, it's only a name. We've been an Oligarchy; a plutocracy for quite awhile now. Our "Constitutional Republic" is more fit for historical fiction books than reality these days). Nevertheless, all this research made me curious about my home state of Kentucky.

Kentucky is known for Bluegrass, tobacco, whiskey, "fast horses and faster women". It's also been known for its backwoods "good ole boys" and rednecks too; of hillbillies living "down in the hollar", for moonshine and racing, be it horse, car, or whatever. If it goes fast, we want to do it. Kentucky is also known for coal mining (and diseases like black lung which strikes 1 in 5 miners and sludge which clogs rivers and streams), abject poverty, a "race to the bottom" educational system, and more recently, drug addiction. Out of its 120 counties, nine have among the highest poverty rates in the country (Owsley County is ranked third in the nation with a poverty rate of 45.2%). Kentucky itself is ranked 47th--third from the bottom. 25% of children in Kentucky live at or below the poverty line. Altogether, that's about 800,000 Kentuckians living at or below the poverty line.

It was once known for its railroads like the Louisville and Nashville (L&N), Southern Railway, and the Illinois Central. While those iconic railroads are gone, some have been replaced by the CSX , Norfolk Southern, and Canadian Pacific, Kentucky remains a key transportation hub for UPS, as well as DHL and FedEx. The largest city (town really) is Louisville, serves as the launch center for UPS under the rather euphemistically sounding "Louisville International Airport" (the only thing "international" about it is if you're in a UPS container. Other than that, it's just a connector). Regardless, Kentucky is still known for its manufacturing, from cars to appliances. However, Kentucky roads are ranked 16th overall with bridge quality ranked 24th and public transit usage is 32nd (also ranked low because of a lack of available public transportation. Many users have also reported unclean and/or unsafe conditions on the available public transit systems). Road quality, however, is actually pretty good. Kentucky is ranked in 7th place.

In terms of education, Kentucky is actually ranked 28th with a 88.6% high school graduation rate despite an overall poverty rate of 18.5% (14% is the national average). It's 8th grade NAEP proficiency test was 27.7% in math and 35.1% in reading. In terms of adults with a bachelor degree, Kentucky was the 5th lowest with a corresponding 15th lowest in terms of income at or above the national average.

The reason I mention all this is to demonstrate the poverty Kentucky experiences amid charges of corruption at the highest levels. Yelp. According to a Harvard study, Kentucky state government is one of the most corrupt in the country. Having been involved in politics for over 40 years, I can't say I was overly surprised by the report. Corruption comes in many forms, from outright bribery to the ever popular quid pro quo. I remember years ago a politician friend of mine telling me a rather amusing story to illustrate my point.

According to my friend, an older gentleman and incumbent, he had long been pressured to support a bill which he simply disliked; in fact, he hated everything about the bill. He was approached by fellow Representatives, by the party whip, by the bill's sponsors, and so on. Finally, after a particularly hard day, he retired to a popular watering hole to get away from all the BS and ponder how he was going to vote the following day. He had downed his second Scotch and water, when in walked one of the most beautiful women he ever saw. She was dressed professionally, but very enticingly all the same. She looked around and finally walked over, sat down beside him and asked his name, which he blurted out like some giddy school boy.

Feeling slightly chagrined, he finally managed to asked to buy her a drink, which she accepted with a smile. After a few more drinks (and more than a lot of flirtation), he paused, and then somewhat sheepish, apologized and said he forgot to ask her name. At that point, she leaned over, exposing her low cut blouse, and in a low sexy voice whispered into his ear, "I'm House Bill 123" (not the real number of course). He never said what happened after that, but hey, quid pro quo! House Bill 123 did pass by the way. Just saying.

Nevertheless, according to the report, compiled by the Harvard University Center for Ethics, Kentucky ranks third in terms of illegally corruption (only Arizona and California did it better). That's the typically dirty deals one usually thinks of when think about political corruption such as bribes, embezzlement, or rigged bids But when it comes to legal corruption, Kentucky is ranked number one in the country (finally, something we're good at besides basketball), coming in ahead of Illinois and Nevada which is saying something if you think about it for a minute! Legal corruption includes things like cronyism, extortion for votes, patronage, influence peddling, using work time for personal time, or nepotism.

Another example which I'm familiar is when an opponent openly violates election laws by campaigning inside the voting polls. By this I mean, handing people campaign literature as people as they signed in to vote or walking up to them as they entered the voting booth and passing out their campaign material. As with most places, Kentucky does not allow any campaigning within 300 feet of the polling place, and most certainly not inside the polling booth! This same example also included campaign signs well within the 300 feet limit of the polling place.

When disgruntled voters and other candidates called the Board of Elections to complain, nothing happened. They were told that there wasn't enough election officers to check out each location where the alleged violation was taking place, and, besides, unless they caught the offending individual in the act, there was nothing they could do! Oh, in case you're wondering how candidate and/or their supporters were able to do this in the first place, they were good friends who the poll workers who simply looked the other way! Another type of tried and true corruption is simply buying votes, either by good ole cash, or as one candidate did, by handing folks a box of Kentucky Fried Chicken as they left the polling place. Now, you can't get anymore "Kentucky Graft" than that!

As an aside, while not exactly considered corruption unless a government employee is being compensated in some way, is the removal of or tampering with political yard signs by opponents or one of the volunteers. Nevertheless, it's still a crime in Kentucky and most other states. In Kentucky it's a classified as "thief of property", a Class "A" misdemeanor which carries a one year in jail and $500 fine per sign. Anyone who defaces or otherwise destroys a political yard sign can be found guilty of a Class "B" misdemeanor for criminal mischief (third degree). This is punishable by 90 days in jail and a $250 fine. Naturally, they have to be caught in the act.

I've heard of an instance where a assistant vice principal of a public school would hire students to steal signs ($5 dollars for large signs and a $1 dollar for a regular yard sign). In some cases, public employees would be "hired" to steal signs, which can obviously be a fairly profitable business since yard signs often go out days or weeks prior to the election, signs are usually stolen late at night or during the wee hours of the morning while the general public is asleep; occasionally even replaced by the opponent's sign. Going hand-in-hand with this is where a public employee who supports a particular candidate, the candidate, or one of their volunteers attempt to intimidate a homeowner from putting out their opponent's yard sign. Of course, there has to be expectation that the threat was real. That too is a crime, and that too is part of the subtle corruption Kentucky politics is known for.

There are literally hundreds of dirty tricks just pertaining to campaigning alone, from convincing someone to run as a "ringer" in a race in order to draw votes away from your opponent, getting a business or union representative to bully groups into not endorsing your opponent (or simply buying them off), to laundering campaign contributions and finding ways to get donated money into the candidate's pocket. Speaking of endorsements, how about getting media oriented "endorsements" to buff up a candidate to make them look good? That can anything from correcting their misstatements to putting the right words in their mouths or just misquoting their opponent; whatever it takes to make them look good. Think it doesn't happen? Think again.

Lastly, another type of corruption which is popular, not just in places like Kentucky, but probably everywhere, is where legislators either refuse or delay to vote on bills which they believe may adversely affect key donors. Instead of hearing and deciding on the merits of a particular bill, they simply decide early on to vote it down, and usually, try and persuade their fellow members to do likewise (often with the tacit implication that if you support my vote, I'll support yours later on). A close cousin of this form of legal corruption is killing a bill in committee.

Before a bill actually makes it to the floor to be voted on, it has to go through at least one--usually more---committee in both the House and the Senate. An effective way to kill a bill is to make sure it never makes it out of committee. This is usually done on the basis of some "technicality" or pretense like needing "additional study" when the evidence is already clearly established. The upside is that occasionally there may be some legitimate issue which needs to be addressed before an informed decision can be made. On the other hand, this can be used to stop an otherwise good bill dead in its tracks.

One good example which is increasingly become overcome by the majority of state legislatures is over Marijuana. Some out-of-touch legislators ("old dinosaurs" as a friend of mine calls them) have tried to kill various bills proposing the legalization of the plant (or at least its decriminalization) for medical or recreational purposes. In a few cases, those leading the charge to stop passage of a bill out of committee have some undeclared vested interest such as ownership of land dedicated to another crop, stock ownership in potentially competing industries, or, as I said previously, donors who may be adversely affected (or if not them directly, then family or close friends). This too is a form of legal corruption which tends to get overlooked and shouldn't.

Now, if these kind of things can happen in a poor backwater state like Kentucky, can you imagine what happens in places like Nevada, Illinois, California, or worse, in Washington DC? These types of corruption, which some consider acceptable behavior, are a few of the reasons for imposing term limits and ending party lead gerrymandering. It's also why certain political offices such as Secretary of State and County Clerk, which oversee state and local elections, must become non-partisan, along with other non-law making political offices such as Treasury Secretary, Agricultural Secretary, State Auditor, and perhaps most importantly, State Attorney General. Locally, offices like Sheriff, County Attorney, Property Valuation Administrator, Circuit Court Clerk, Commonwealth Attorney (or the equivalent), Coroner, and similar offices should also be non-partisan and term limited (can you imagine any reason whatsoever why a Coroner or legal office needs to be partisan? Why would it even matter?). You would think that citizens would want these kind of positions to be non-partisan!

It's not until changes are made to the system that a state as poor as Kentucky can have any hope of changing things around and focusing on what really matters like children, education, nutrition, adding good paying jobs, and rebuilding a decay infrastructure. Of course, these type of changes need to be not just in Kentucky, but everywhere if we're to improve society. To quote President John F. Kennedy, "those who make peaceful revolutions impossible make violent revolution inevitable".



'Not enough jobs'. Nine of the 30 poorest counties in U.S. are in Eastern Kentucky


Kentucky Poverty Rate by County


Geographic disparity: States with the best (and worse) school


Harvard study: Kentucky's state government one of the most corrupt in the country