Something just dawned on me about corporate expenditures in politics--

[Jackpine Radical]

There is a very interesting monetary feedback loop going on.

The corporations put up billions to elect the politicians of their choice; the politicians use the money to buy M$M ads; a few major corporations, with deeply entangled ownership, own the M$M, so those corporations thus directly recover the expenditures they make to buy the government. Other players, such as small contributors and unions,end up redistributing their funds back to the ownership class.

[RobertEarl]

1. It is just business

If I had a money losing newspaper I would attack the politicians, and when they came to me to complain, I would tell them that if they bought more ads from my newspaper they could win, maybe.

Now we know why the newspapers and other media have been bought up by major corporations.

[arcane1]

2. It's an open invitation to money laundering, too n/t

[reddread]

8. nobody invited me

i think "ad buys" are scarcer than they would like you to think, and I bet a lot of trashy ads are to cover the vacuum.
that money goes places we would find completely unacceptable, as would our traditions of law and fair play.
There is NO requirement for mass media to profit where they should be GRATEFULLY serving the public interest, and we are in a post paper, post distribution world of data and media. There is no need to pay, except to purchase silence or favor.
when they take money, they abrogate a trust and responsiblity that should be inviolate.
the absolute power grab of corporate pirates over just the last few decades has left American citizens holding their proverbial
you know whats.

[Rex]

3. Business as usual. The SCOTUS made it very clear

Corporate money trumps individual voters. Sure, they waste billions on ads...but the corporate overlords always get all of the pie.

[jberryhill]

4. Oh, it's much better than that

First, you set up a "political consulting company" that does mailers, media production, and campaign management consulting.

Then you set your PAC.

Then, both your campaign and your PAC hire your consulting company, so that your "expenses" as a candidate are income to your other entities.

Whether Sheldon Adelson's money is ending up in the pockets of Comcast, Time Warner and the corporate owners of strings of TV and radio stations is easy to characterize as going "back to the ownership class", but Adelson is looking for leverage to protect his other money laundering operations. The money isn't exactly going back to the same people, or at least not a significant quantity of it, because of all of the palms out along the way.

[Fred Sanders]

5. More people need to connect the dots...the mass media is in a huge conflcit of interest positon

depending on ads from corporations they then must discuss, or not, on the shows paid for by those ads.....

It is incestuous and it makes a mockery of the "free" press.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. The same can of course be said of newspapers throughout our history,

as well as of the public broadcast media in that they rely on corporate donations.

[Fred Sanders]

11. Not near this extent, not near the political money, it is no contest with TV news, the money is

pouring in and the lies and protection of the advertiser is pouring out.

[Jackpine Radical]

13. Citizen Koch.

Last year, public television officials pulled $150,000 in funds they had committed to the documentary and cancelled plans for the film's broadcast premiere, as reported by Jane Mayer in The New Yorker, in fear of losing the financial backing of major PBS donor David Koch, the ultra-conservative billionaire industrialist and WGBH and WNET trustee. In this stunning turn of events, CITIZEN KOCH was effectively censored from the public airwaves.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/citizen_koch_2013/

[FSogol]

7. The circle of life......

[SomethingFishy]

9. Here's the thing...

When you start following the money, looking at the big picture and putting all the pieces in place, you realize we are well and wholly fucked. All you can do is put your head down, and try to take care of yourself and your family as best as you are being allowed to.

When you look at for profit health care, a for profit justice system, when you look at income inequality, corporate personhood, a complacent media, a government that has shifted so far to the right that conservative views are routinely viewed as the perspective of the left and right wing views are actually paranoid lunacy, you start to realize that the world is completely bonkers. I mean it, we have gone around the bend and landed in Crazyasfuckistan. I actually find myself avoiding knowing too much about too much. If only so I can keep my sanity.

[Enthusiast]

18. It's Bizarro World. DC Comics had it nailed way back then.

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[libodem]

10. Yep

[img][/img]

[Spitfire of ATJ]

12. The biggest laugh? Reagan claimed all that money was going to go into PAYROLL.

[daleanime]

14. K&R....

[Savannahmann]

15. I'm afraid you haven't even scratched the surface.

Let's talk Defense shall we? It's been a long standing tradition that the military officers who push through procurement programs get hired by the companies that got the contract. But, it gets far worse than that. Because Congressmen and Senators are not subject to insider trading laws. Here's what I mean. If you work for Acme Defense Industries, and tell me over a beer that your company is about to get a big contract to make the mother of all slingshots for Wile Coyote, and I buy stock on that information. I have just committed insider trading, that's a felony. But if I am a Congressman, who is about to vote to give the Pentagon money to buy the mother of all slingshots, and I buy stock knowing this will boost the price of your stock, I have committed no crime.

So the people who oversee the entire system, are exempt from the same laws that are supposed to make sure all deals are above board and legit. Now, Acme Defense Industries can contribute to the campaign, and provide me the congressman with many wonderful perks. For example, they can provide me with a private Jet. Now, this isn't free. I am required to pay for the jet. However, I am required to pay for the jet at the rate of one first class seat, a mere fraction of the money it costs to fly the jet over the route. So Washington to Los Angeles, say a thousand dollars for a first class ticket. It actually cost tens of thousands of dollars to fly the jet that way.

Now, ethics rules mean that I have to declare my stock holdings to the Congress, and I have to let people know I got a ride on the Acme Defense Industries jet. If I tour the factory in Los Angeles, I can call it a fact finding mission, and have the tax payers foot the bill for the first class seat.

Now, let's say you are a semi government agency like Freddy Mac. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_Mac#Investigations Then you can hold lots of fundraisers for the congressmen who vote on your budget. Oh you may be fined by the FEC for it, but all you do then is transfer the money from one government account to another government account. Then the taxpayers foot the bill for your budget shortfall. Nice system right?

My friend, you haven't even scratched the surface of the problem. I told my neighbor I'm about convinced we would be better off picking 535 names out of a phone book and giving them Congressional duties like we do Jury Duty. Imagine it, you walk to the mailbox, and there is the notice that you have been selected to serve your district in washington DC. You stomp into the house waving the sheet of paper. "God damn it, I just got picked to go to Congress!" Your mate gasps and says. "How can we get out of it?"

Of course, that would mean assigned government housing. "Here you go Congressman, this is the apartment for the Representative from the 8th District of Virginia."

The last person I know of who left Washington broke (other than those who blew it all on legal fees) was Harry Truman. Everyone else leaves Washington quite wealthy, if they leave and aren't hired immediately as an influence peddler.

[Jackpine Radical]

19. I'll see your Truman

& raise you Feingold.

[Savannahmann]

25. Truman left with only his National Guard pension.

Truman left the White House and his income was $112.56 per month. He signed a book deal, and after paying his assistants, got $37,000. It was his destitute status that led to the Congress passed the Former President's act. Now, when you're so broke that Congress decides that all former Presidents should get some retirement money, that's broke. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman#Post-presidency

The former president was quoted in 1957 as saying to then-House Majority Leader John McCormack, "Had it not been for the fact that I was able to sell some property that my brother, sister, and I inherited from our mother, I would practically be on relief, but with the sale of that property I am not financially embarrassed.

Feingold isn't rich, but Truman had to move in to his Mother in Law's house.

[Jackpine Radical]

26. I seem to recall that US Grant was also at the poverty line

when he left office.

I actually didn't know/remember (whichever) about Truman's situation, so thanks for informing/reminding me.

[Savannahmann]

27. Which is why I said he left Washington Broke.

Because he was literally broke. He was one step away from being on Welfare. That's where 90% of us live, and he was there. One of the many reasons I always had great respect for the man. He passed on all those opportunities to get rich while in office.

[Jackpine Radical]

28. Yeah, I get that. Now.

[valerief]

16. Don't forget all the research done for corporations paid by the taxpayer. nt

[Enthusiast]

17. Oh, it's a scene, man.

They have this fucking country screwed up every possible way.

[libodem]

21. You are right!

[img][/img]

[Adam051188]

20. you just defined fascism.

[Jackpine Radical]

22. Yeah, pretty much.

[KoKo]

23. Can you go Further.....your post left me hanging to viewpoint and links?

[Jackpine Radical]

24. It was just one of those D'Oh moments.

I'd have to dig some to come up with actual links or documentation. One would look at the individual stockholders, the interlocking directorships, etc. I think you'd find the same people owning both the media companies & weapons producers, oil & insurance cos., investment banks, etc.

[KoKo]

29. I can understand what you say then. Yes...sometimes giving links and such

when one assumes others have an experience that should make "what Your OP Says...obvious" is beyond dealing with.

One either Knows from years on DU and Reading or One Doesn't.

I think I understand. In fact, I DO UNDERSTAND..now that I think further.