Thread: POLITICIANS INFLUENCED BY BIG CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

This is a major problem with our system...politicians should represent the citizens, their voters, not their major contributors for their campaigns. Of course apathy is a major problem as well
~~~

POLITICIANS INFLUENCED BY BIG CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS



By Michael Cutler
June 10, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

I generally limit my commentaries to issues concerning immigration and related matters, however, I just could not resist the temptation to weigh in on the news article "Court Ties Campaign Largess to Judicial Bias" that appeared in the Washington Post.

I thought that the general rule of thumb is that you need not state the obvious. But then, in this wacky world, I guess you have to wonder what is now considered "obvious."

The United States Supreme Court ruled, for the first time that what was deemed "excessive campaign contributions" create a threat to a fair trial. Could you imagine that! A judge might be influenced by a campaign contribution! Wow! That thought just takes my breath away!

Now it is official- money corrupts!

As you may know, I have appeared in various events around this magnificent country to participate in debates, panel discussions and other venues including state legislative hearings to provide my insight and perspectives on immigration related issues. When I have the opportunity I like to be able to talk about how our politicians are influenced by campaign contributions.

I'd like to make the point that because of campaign contributions our citizens get the "Best government money can buy whenever there is an election!"

To make this point as clearly as I can, I'd like to talk about the issue of ethics and law enforcement. Civil servants are prohibited from accepting gifts when they are acting in their official capacity. When I received a police medal from the Japanese Police for the assistance I rendered their government in convincing a citizen of Japan who was suspect in the United States to turn herself over to the Japanese officials in the United States. She was wanted, in Japan, for smuggling cocaine into Japan from the United States, I was required, as you might expect, to report the award to my boss and it was only after it was determined that the value of the medal was less than $25 that I was able to keep it. I also had to report the fact that although I offered to pay for the lunch I invited the Japanese Consul General to join me at in conjunction with the award, that he insisted on paying for the meal when the check came. (No wise cracks please, about whether or not I had to return the meal!)

The point is that all civil servants are prohibited from accepting gratuities that might influence their decisions and conduct.

If a police officer was given a cup of hot coffee by a compassionate shopkeeper on a frigid winter's day as he directed traffic and he did not pay for the coffee, he would most likely face an angry supervisor if he was observed accepting that cup of coffee!

Yet, politicians routinely boast about being "effective fund raisers!"

Can you imagine what would happen to a cop or a federal agent who might tell his superiors that he was an effective fund raiser?!

So, now the Supreme Court, (at least five ninths of them) in a display of real world understanding have come to the conclusion that campaign contributions can make a judge less than objective! (I would love to know what "excessive" means!)

Now here is the really BIG QUESTION: If cops and federal agents can be corrupted by gratuities, if judges can be swayed by campaign contributions, when will others who hold elected office such as mayors, councilmen, governors, Congressional Representatives, Senators and even United States Presidents be barred from accepting campaign contributions?

The obvious answer: NEVER!

One of my favorite oxymorons, even surpassing the late George Carlin's "Jumbo Shrimp" is "Political Reality!"

The solution is to make certain that we vote in elections in such adequate numbers that we can truly "Throw the bums out!" (As we used to say at Ebbets Field where the Brooklyn Dodgers played baseball when I was a young boy).

In less than two years more than one third of the seats in the United States Senate will be up for election. In less than two years every single seat in the House of Representatives will be up for grabs! The politicians have become accustomed to expecting that the power of the incumbency is on their side. We only have ourselves to blame for this.

We the People need to take every opportunity to confront those who were elected to represent us and make it clear that if they fail to represent us, we will find someone who will!

The large scale apathy demonstrated by citizens of this nation has emboldened elected representatives to all but ignore the needs of the average American citizen in a quest for massive campaign funds and the promises of votes to be ostensibly delivered by special interest groups. There is much that we cannot do but there is one thing that We the People absolutely must do- we must stop sitting on the sidelines!

The collective failure of We the People to get involved in making our concerns known to our politicians have nearly made the concerns of the great majority of the citizens of this nation all but irrelevant to the politicians. For far too many of them the fundamental principle could be summed up by a two word expression: "Money talks!"

I implore you to get involved!

http://www.newswithviews.com/Cutler/michael164.htm

politicians should represent the citizens, their voters, not their major contributors for their campaigns.


when i call elected officials offices, this is one thing i say

what I want to know is how this doesnt fall under the RICO ACT

RICO offenses
Under the law, racketeering activity means:

Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act);
Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18 );
Embezzlement of union funds;
Bankruptcy or securities fraud;
Drug trafficking;
Money laundering and related offenses;
Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain);
Acts of terrorism.
Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity. The U.S. Supreme Court has instructed federal courts to follow the continuity-plus-relationship test in order to determine whether the facts of a specific case give rise to an established pattern. Predicate acts are related if they "have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events." (H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.) Continuity is both a closed and open ended concept, referring to either a closed period of conduct, or to past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition.


[edit] Where RICO laws might be applied
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (April 2009)

Although some of the RICO predicate acts are extortion and blackmail, one of the most successful applications of the RICO laws has been the ability to indict or sanction individuals for their behavior and actions committed against witnesses and victims in alleged retaliation or retribution for cooperating with law enforcement or intelligence agencies.

Violations of the RICO laws can be alleged in cases where civil lawsuits or criminal charges are brought against individuals or corporations in retaliation for said individuals or corporations working with law enforcement, or against individuals or corporations who have sued or filed criminal charges against a defendant.

Anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) laws can be applied in an attempt to curb alleged abuses of the legal system by individuals or corporations who utilize the courts as a weapon to retaliate against whistle blowers, victims, or to silence another's speech. RICO could be alleged if it can be shown that lawyers and/or their clients conspired and collaborated to concoct fictitious legal complaints solely in retribution and retaliation for themselves having been brought before the courts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RICO