« Essences | David Seaton's Blog | A reminder for gloating Republicans »

A Republic, if you can keep it


A once and future king
                              Good King Michael the First?

"Well, what have we got--a Republic or a Monarchy?"

"A Republic, if you can keep it." 
Reply attributed to Benjamin Franklin at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787

Right off the bat let me assure my readers that this is not a personal attack on the billionaire Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg. The word is that Bloomberg is a very fine mayor, one of the best that New York has ever had.

This is more like a riddle,

Question: "When is a republic not a republic?
Answer: "When it's for sale."
I am convinced that the principal problem of the United States  more than its endless wars, more than the devastation of climate change, more than anything else, is the way that its politics are financed.

The foundational idea of government of the people, by the people and for the people is completely short circuited at every turn by way US politics is financed today.

Bloomberg is a product of this system, not its cause. He has simply taken it to its logical conclusion.

Like ABC: Government in the USA is for sale and Bloomberg has bought some.


Running for public office in the United States is insanely expensive and politicians, people who are supposed to be serving their voters, must constantly go hat in hand to wealthy men and women like Michael Bloomberg to finance their campaigns.

Bloomberg, the richest man in New York, has simply cut out the "middlemen", the political parties, which are at bottom machines for raising campaign money, and has decided to run things himself financing his campaigns with his own money, massively outspending the opposition.

Now, this may be rather quixotic on Bloomberg's part, I imagine most rich people would prefer to simply buy or rent office holders instead of taking the trouble of administrating  public affairs themselves; much in the same way that they have a gardener to tend their gardens and a chef to cook their meals; easier and cheaper too, although some may like to potter around the roses on weekends or try their hand at a souffle now and then.

In his enthusiasm for politics, Bloomberg apparently has taken it in to his head to cook everybody's meals and manure all the roses.

The eccentricity of wealth? Thirst for power? Noblesse oblige?

It is even said that Bloomberg is going to buy the New York Times.
 
Of course, if this were just about New York it wouldn't matter that much, but Hizzoner probably will end up taking a shot at the White House and I think he'll have a very good chance of taking it... as an independent.

The Republican party is now and perhaps irremediably in the hands of its nut fringe: the Bible thumpers and the teabaggers. It appeals only to white people, but not to all white people and it has become poison for nearly everyone whose complexion is not pinkish-gray or whose name ends in a vowel.

And unless employment surges dramatically from here to 2012 and the wars end in something less than a rout, etc, etc, etc, Obama may only be attractive to voters if the only alternative is crazy, stupid republicans of the Sarah Palin variety.

At this point a man with a brilliant record of achievement, both in the private sector and in one of America's most demanding and politically sensitive public jobs, who is obviously every bit as intelligent and hip as Barack Obama is, who, just by reaching in his pocket can raise much more money than the president's fabled Internet operation, might have a very good chance of being the first independent ever elected President of the United States.

From the point of view of how he might carry out his duties once in office this probably wouldn't be a tragedy because Michael Bloomberg has never given any indication of being a crooked slime bag like Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, but the idea of a man with a huge private fortune and a powerful communications empire also controlling the levers of American political power directly, the same way that Berlusconi does Italy's, makes me nervous.

In my innocence I always thought that democracy was about stopping powerful men like Michael Bloomberg, no matter how talented and well intentioned they might be, from having too much power over us little folk, less they end up oppressing us. Silly me.

10 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

The prospect of "a man with a huge private fortune and a powerful communications empire also controlling the levers of American political power directly", makes me "nervous" too. The fruition of a dystopic dream that one day, you too could grow up to buy the presidency.

user-pic

Really interesting theory, Dave. I can see it. Wish I knew more about Bloomberg; in the meantime, if you say he's a good mayor, I'll try to take your word for it.

user-pic

Why are you attempting to scare the shite out of an old man on a quiet Sunday eve?

I watch the midget on morning joke sometimes. I DO NOT LIKE HIM OR TRUST HIM.

But like Rudy Giuliani he keeps the whores and bums out of Times Square. His appeal comes from somewhere

user-pic
he keeps the whores and bums out of Times Square.
People have gotten to be president of the US with much less concrete achievement than that. I am not saying that Bloomberg would be a bad president, I'm saying it would be bad for him to be president, which isn't the same thing.
user-pic

Just a footnote:
What exactly would I suggest?

  • total political financing reform
  • radical transparency
  • forbid out of state contributions to congressional campaigns
  • spending limits
  • much, much, much shorter campaigns
  • limits on TV time
  • anything you can think of that would actually force candidates to run on their actual merits, not their ability to finance their campaigns

user-pic

but the idea of a man with a huge private fortune and a powerful communications empire also controlling the levers of American political power directly, the same way that Berlusconi does Italy's, makes me nervous.

FDR was also quite wealthy as was LBJ and JFK. Maybe not as wealthy, but right up there.

C

user-pic

The shorter campaigns doesn't do anything for it, when the Republicans favorite tactic is to try to lie exormitantly and outrun anyone catching them at it. People should be able to contribute to political campaigns, to a max limit that damn near everyone can afford, and companies shouldn't be able to contribute to political campaigns at all. And the money should go into a pot by position, and divided equally between the contenders that met enough signatures. If they don't spend it, they should have to give it back.

user-pic

You think this country would elect an East Coast Jew for president? Oy! Don't hold your breath.

user-pic

Especially one who's real anal and goes all nanny state on you when you least expect it or want it....anyone who thought Al Gore sounded like a schoolmarm sometimes hasn't really see anything on that front until they've seen Bloomie in full whiny lecturing mode. Look, he's one of our "special" people (meant kinda like the Dana Carvey's church lady used to say it,) he's nuts, he's a pill, he's a pain, but he works for $1 a year, we understand him, know how to put up with him, the rest of you wouldn't want him, really you wouldn't.

user-pic

You know what David, I just figured out what bugs me about this post. I understand what you are trying to say, but you just picked a really bad example in Bloomberg.

Beeeecause---I bet you'd be hard-pressed to find a single New York city citizen who has ever thought of NYC as a "republic."

We're not a "republic," we're a city mostly run by a quite large bunch of executives that we citizens hire to do the work of running the city in a democratic process every four years. And despite what that wikipedia entry says about our legislative body, making it sound like they have a bit of power, they don't, they are just bunch of politicos who are there mostly to bloviate, few citizens would dream of asking them to help them with anything important, most of us don't actually know what they do if anything. If you need help you go to your Borough President or your local boards or the Public Advocate. It's a huge city-state built of many neighborhoods run by a large byzantine executive branch and has been that way for a very long time.

So if there's this billionaire who really really wants the shitty job of chief executive so bad that every time he comes up for his job review with us he spends a ton of money to court us to employ him again, and he's smart and has a lot of skills that are needed to run a city like this, a and he says he'll do it again for no salary, and throw in lots of helping on the side with donations to "charity" that are actually things for the city that the taxpayers can't afford to do, well, even though he gets on our nerves sometimes, we said last time "well ok if you want it that bad, go ahead."

Now this time, the job is even lousier than it was before, because you see, like it or not, the Wall Street that everyone else loves to hate is our Main Street, and the denizens of that street used to be paying a lot of taxes around here, and spending money on things that employed lots of people, and it just so happens that this billionaire understands their business intimately. And we are in a real pickle about how we are going to pay for anything. And he still wants the job, he wants it so bad that he works to break the rules about retirement time. So we're probably going to hire him again.

We not a republic, we're sort of more like a corporation where all the citizens are shareholders with equal voting privileges. And I believe the federation of the united states of America under which we stand, now that was founded as a republic, a republic with expressed intent that local governments could be pretty free in choices about how to govern themselves aside from federal rules, no?

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address