Are We Doing Our Elected Representatives A Disservice by Putting Temptation In Their Way?

Not a campaign sign

I think we've been pretty clear here that we don't like the temptation legislators who take immense sums of money from special interests in annual "donations"-- and then vote on the very bills those special interests consider downright existential-- face. The Financial/Insurance/Real Estate sector has invested more in Congressional campaigns than any other sector in the economy-- and they've profited grandly. Between their lobbying efforts ($3,560,882,343 since 1998) and their direct donations to members of Congress ($2,237,819,188 since 1990), they've spent a bundle-- but they've gotten in back in spades and... well, everyone wins, right? Sure-- except the general public, which foots the bill when everything goes bust, as it did after the spate of bankster-inspired deregulations over the last few decades. The entire economy tanked, the banksters' unborn great grandchildren will be living like lords and ladies for generations to come and the actual Lords and Ladies in our own House of Lords are not doing badly themselves, regardless of how utterly mediocre many of them are. Of the 23 members on the Senate Banking Committee, all of whom [except Herb Kohl] justify taking gigantic donations from the banksters, 7 have gotten over $3 million, far more than your average Lord.

Chris Dodd (D-CT)- $13,563,456
Chuck Schumer (D-NY)- $12,909,246
Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)- $4,695,388
Richard Shelby (R-AL)- $4,428,842
Evan Bayh (D-IN)- $4,053,616
Bob Menendez (D-NJ)- $3,939,922
Tim Johnson (D-SD)- $3,050,066

But what about when the temptation is even more direct-- like when the member of a committee charged with writing legislation owns stock in the exact same companies the legislation impacts? Yesterday's Hill reported that something like half the members of the Banking Committee "had holdings in financial institutions that have taken funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)." They wrote that legislation and the value of their personal portfolios depended on the health of the institutions they used our money to bail out. Among the Lords who own stocks in companies that were bailed out with taxpayer dollars are Chuck Schumer, Tim Johnson. Herb Kohl, David Diapers Vitter, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Mike Johanns, Mel Martinez, Bob Corker, Bob Bennett, Mark Warner, and Chris Dodd. Looks like Paul Kane did a Washington Post piece this morning along the same lines-- and AP ran a similar item. Kane points out that "30 key lawmakers" are helping draft the nation's health care legislation while they have millions of dollars (collectively) in companies directly effected. Anyone think that might be like a super-duper conflict of interest?

Anyone a fan of New Order? "Temptation" originally came out in 1982 as a stand alone single and five years later was released on Substance, a singles compilation. The song was also used in Trainspotting.



Of course it isn't only the Medical-Industrial Complex that has been buying Congress. The banksters are even worse. And Open Secrets shared a truly repulsive open secret this morning when they revealed the immense sums of special interest money going to candidates who will be voting on their legislative priorities. On a day when many of us have been feeling badly for Iranians who saw their dreams and hopes for democracy dashed, it's very sad to read how systemically corrupt our own government is.