Previous perspectives

By Steve Mack

 
Although it seemed to take forever – and even so, it’s too soon to tell – it may be that a long-missing sense of perspective and a demand for fairness is returning to the political debate in the United States. Beginning with the Occupy Wall Street protests in New York City, but spreading quickly to city parks, university campuses, and both real-world and virtual meeting places, an adamant demand to end the stranglehold that money has gained on U.S. politics is growing.

Through this movement, a democratic groundswell has appeared which seeks to end the undue influence of corporations and wealthy campaign donors on the U.S. government. The protesters believe this influence has created public policies and weak regulation that have led directly to extreme and growing economic inequality, a shrinking middle class and a crushing recession that has damaged millions and evaporated opportunity for a generation of young people.

What many have felt, but have only recently begun to express, is that the U.S. government has been far more responsive to a few powerful interests than to the well-being of the vast majority of its citizens.

While politicians of both political parties, including President Barack Obama, aggressively seek and accept private donations, part of this growing conflict is clearly ideological. Since the presidency of Ronald Reagan, the reigning ideology in the United States has moved steadily rightward. With the emergence of the Tea Party, extreme right-wing ideas – that not long ago were rejected as too radical even by conservatives – have found a central place in the national political debate and a loud voice in Congress. One result of an ideology that rejects an active role for government in solving social problems and promoting the common welfare, and which is hostile to regulation and taxation, is fallow ground for the narrow interests of the wealthy and industries that have benefitted from little or no oversight, and used the government and common resources to further their own ends.

One of the principal industries which benefitted financially from lack of government regulation – and which caused the recession – is the financial industry: the banks and traders based on Wall Street.

The right-wing fundamentalist ideology of the Tea Party and many in Congress ignores U.S. history over the past century and the central role that the federal government has played in creating the middle class and building the nation’s wealth, including reigning in trusts and monopolies; regulating the rights of workers; eradicating diseases and protecting public health; building infrastructure and other basic public works; investing in education at all levels, including implementing the G.I. Bill; supporting basic science, agricultural, medical and industrial research; regulating currency, banking and investment; ending segregation and ensuring civil rights; implementing Social Security and Medicare; disaster planning, prevention and relief; protecting and managing the environment and natural resources; promoting national security and stable international relations, and other essential roles. While the ideological right wing claims to defend the nation’s basic values, these appear to be those of a country that hasn’t existed for over 150 years, if ever; and the greatness of the United States that they purport to value never would have evolved if the role they advocate for the federal government had been in place.

Of course, there have been abuses of the power of the federal government and its programs – such as waste, fraud, ineffective programs, and undeserved subsidies, tax breaks and other types of preferential treatment. However, more often than not, these have been the result of the undue influence of private interests of the kind that the evolving protests seek to eradicate. Also, there have been misguided wars – the biggest and worst kind of waste – such as Vietnam, Iraq and the War on Drugs. Finally, one of the biggest areas of inefficiency in the federal budget is Medicare, the effective reform of which much of the medical industry, which benefits from abuse, has struggled hard to prevent.

An effective federal government means taxes must be collected. These should be kept to a minimum, consistent with the effective execution of the government’s basic functions and keeping the national debt within reasonable bounds. Political and governmental reforms to eliminate abuse should be applauded by the vast majority of taxpayers because they would make government more effective and efficient, as well as cheaper. And, as is also being advocated by protesters, there is no good reason that Federal income tax should not be progressive – as it always has been – with those earning more paying a higher rate. At last count, one percent of households in the U.S. owned 27 percent of the nation’s wealth – the greatest concentration of riches in the fewest hands since before the Great Depression – while tax rates on the wealthiest are much lower than they were 50 years ago. All of these people benefitted – disproportionately and greatly – from living and working in a country with an effective government.

Although they can say whatever they want, the effectiveness of these protesters will be greatest if it avoids becoming an ideological left-wing response to the Tea Party, which would sharply narrow its potential base of support, make it easier to attack or marginalize, and dilute its powerful, nonpartisan, essential and completely valid core message of attacking the corrupting influence of money on government and supporting a government that acts in the interests of the majority.

As the civil rights struggle of the 1960s showed, in order to have the greatest impact a reform movement must keep its eye on the prize. In this case, the prize is a government that actually represents the people.n
 
Steve Mack is an environmental consultant. He is a U.S. citizen living in Costa Rica.