Study: Big Business and Special Interest Group Elites Dominate and Influence Policy

Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2014 by Post Scripts

Posted by Tina

A study confirming everyone’s suspicion that money buys political influence has just come out…talk about discovering the obvious! The greater message to America: Get out and vote, get active, or stop complaining. Is this something that required a study or is there something else going on?

Voter turn out in the coming election is a major concern, particularly for the Democrat Party. Obama’s many scandals, his dismal foreign affairs record, the miserable state of the economy and significant failures in his signature accomplishment, Obamacare, give Democrats few reasons to organize, much less go to the polls. But a new study focusing on political influence and power conducted by Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University could offer Democrats the punch they need to fire up the base. Its all about being the victim of big business and special interest groups with piles of cash.

The results of the study in question are discussed in an article at The Hill and are bound to fire up the 99%, including our pal Dewey, who are convinced that ordinary citizens are powerless in a nation controlled by rich guys and evil big business. There is a great deal of truth in the story, money has talked for centuries and everyone has always known it:

The analysts found that when controlling for the power of economic elites and organized interest groups, the influence of ordinary Americans registers at a “non-significant, near-zero level.” The analysts further discovered that rich individuals and business-dominated interest groups dominate the policymaking process. The mass-based interest groups had minimal influence compared to the business-based interest groups.

The study also debunks the notion that the policy preferences of business and the rich reflect the views of common citizens. They found to the contrary that such preferences often sharply diverge and when they do, the economic elites and business interests almost always win and the ordinary Americans lose.

The authors also say that given limitations to tapping into the full power elite in America and their policy preferences, “the real world impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater” than their findings indicate.

Oh dear, ordinary citizens found to be, “non-significant, near-zero level. That’s a BFD, as Joe Biden might say. Now for the guilt trip. The story concludes, rightly, that ordinary citizens can’t really complain since too many of them fail to vote (90%) and no longer participate in grass roots activism:

Ordinary citizens in recent decades have largely abandoned their participation in grassroots movements. Politicians respond to the mass mobilization of everyday Americans as proven by the civil rights and women’s movements of the 1960s and 1970s. But no comparable movements exist today. Without a substantial presence on the ground, people-oriented interest groups cannot compete against their wealthy adversaries. (Emphsis mine)

What’s missing here? Anybody?

How about the conservative grass roots Tea Party movement? They don’t count? What about the intense involvement in conservative grass roots politics that ordinary citizens have been involved in since Reagan? What about the very real threat this movement poses to the Democrat Party as evidenced by the IRS targeting of Tea Party and conservative organizations and the general, Alinsky style, targeting of any conservative group, spokesperson, or candidate?

And what about the calculated effort on the part of the Democrat Party elites, including their big monied backers and media supporters, to divide the nation by class and by issue? Is this not an effort to gin up grassroots power and affect policy? How about the non-stop demonizing of the business and banking community, as if the people who work in these are not “ordinary” American citizens?

Democrat elites and the ordinary citizens who empower them have been pushing resentment and class and race envy and resentment in the citizenry for decades. Every election cycle and every issue always has a companion Democrat “people oriented” activism attached to it, the last big one culminating in the manufactured Occupy Wall Street protests that were such a total (grubby) farce.

Call me cynical…this study screams liberal Alinsky tactic to me.

And so, a warning…don’t buy into the easy conclusion that individuals don’t count…that the poor individual is helpless unless he gets involved in (left wing) pacs and movements. Democrat elites have proven over the past nearly six years that they are not the friend of ordinary citizens. Democrats in power pick winners and losers and play political games to buy votes. Democrats make deals rather than leading or governing. Democrats do favors to gain backing from big monied interests and work behind closed doors, as Pelosi did to pass Obamacare, while at the same time feeding voters lies about what they intend. (Keep your doctor…save $2500 a year)

Here in California Governor Brown has offered special environmental regulation and tax breaks to Elan Musk in a bid to get him to put his battery manufacturing facility in California rather than some other state. Why doesn’t Brown care about other businesses or the people who might find work if he offered similar incentives to ALL business? If he can see the logic of a business friendly tax and regulation policy for one elite company why does he not see the advantage for EVERYONE in creating better overall regulation and tax policy?

And as long as I’ve brought up California policy as an example, why isn’t water storage a higher priority for the Democrat elites that run our state than a bullet train to nowhere?

The thing about studies is that they are most useful when we scratch beneath the surface and ask questions. There are many good reasons to become active in politics and I strongly urge people to get involved in the political conversation…to read and absorb everything…but most of all to develop a strong sense of curiosity regarding motive and a hefty bit of skepticism. Learn to drill down and discover the greater truths in the things you read and hear, including studies…then test them against your experience.

Ordinary Americans depend on vibrancy in the economy for jobs, for opportunities to create retirement nest eggs, for good prices on the products they need and the products they dream about having one day. Ordinary Americans depend on a vibrant economy to support the necessary functioning of government too…a military to defend our nation, border security, our federal court system and locally, schools, police and fire, the courts, and infrastructure. Ordinary Americans depend on a vibrant economy in order to raise their children in a stable, harmonious atmosphere. Most everything government has its nose into is costing us that harmony and stability.

If power in the hands of the people is the goal then the #1 requirement has to be less government involvement. Ordinary citizens have the power of the purse over business, we need not fear them unless we turn our power over to government to control them. It is then that business people are forced to use their money to influence rather than produce. Ordinary citizens can keep business honest; we vote every day as we demand and purchase products and services. That power grows when we claim our individual standing and put government back in its place as our servant.

Big government isn’t the thing that makes America strong…the people are! Ordinary citizens pursuing happiness in an atmosphere of freedom make America stronger for everyone. In that atmosphere some Americans will naturally become very wealthy and good for them. Others will remain middle class and some will continue to struggle. This is a natural state that will always exist in any system. But the principles of freedom and individual choice that inspired our founders to create a republican form of limited government for America have proven to be the best foundation devised by man to offer opportunity to the least among us. In such a system ordinary people can reach for the stars and touch them and in doing so create they create wealth and jobs for others.

We will all do much better, and we will have much more individual power, if we will simply remember who we are and vote for those who believe in individual freedom and less government intrusion. Unfortunately for Democrats the political candidates that are most likely to honor individuality and the right to pursue happiness can be found in the Republican Party. Dismantling redundant, wasteful, controlling government is possible, creating a vibrant healthy economy is possible, defense of our nation and borders is possible, but the study is right that it will take ongoing activism and voting (smart) at election time.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Study: Big Business and Special Interest Group Elites Dominate and Influence Policy

  1. Dewey says:
    Friday, August 15, 2014 at 12:00 pm

    How about the conservative grass roots Tea Party movement? –

    I can explain.. We do not consider the Tea Party a grass roots movement. The Koch’s first called it the U S Tea Party The same agenda was in David Koch’s 1980 VP candidate platform.

    The nut Job Rick santelli pushed it and people joined. The platform was not formed grassroots.

    The platform is the same old Corporate rule platform. All Tea Party members repeat the same stuff taught to them.

    Word Origin

    noun, (used with a singular or plural verb). Also, grass roots
    1.
    the common or ordinary people, especially as contrasted with the leadership or elite of a political party, social organization, etc.; the rank and file.

    The political Elite run the Tea Party not rank and file.

    It amazes me that the good people involved in the tea party do not form a real grassroots org. Many of us independents have reached out…

    But the Tea Party only cares about everything being their way and to win control over the majority of others. The hate and lies upset the majority.

    reaganomics have the failure of any other president to stop them has brought us to where we are.

    Still waiting for all those trickle down jobs and the benefits of how privatizing Healthcare has brought the cost down..

    Corporate rule by the 1% is where we ended up

  2. Dewey says:
    Friday, August 15, 2014 at 12:50 pm

    David Koch AFT admitting they are the Tea Party

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JjQxPJOAfg

    It’s all the Koch Platform

    Free enterprise means ownership by a few…

  3. Peggy says:
    Friday, August 15, 2014 at 2:11 pm

    Here’s your laugh for today. Proof what goes around really does come around and bite your butt.

    Guess Who Al Gore Is Suing:

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/15/guess-who-al-gore-is-suing/

  4. Peggy says:
    Friday, August 15, 2014 at 3:42 pm

    Now, it’s time to cry. A billion dollars went to give the rich more goodies paid for by the poor.

    Will it be enough to outrage the democrats or will they again just accept the taking from some to give to others fills their socialist agenda?

    Report: Tax credits meant to help poor communities spent on doggie day care, sculptures, breweries:

    Federal tax credits meant to stimulate the economies of low-income communities have gone to dog day cares, sculptures, recording studios, and breweries, according to a report released by Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.).

    Through the New Markets Tax Credit program, tax credits are sold to private investors for development projects in poor communities, amounting to approximately $1 billion in credits every year. The credits are intended to create jobs for poor areas.

    However, due to the program’s overly broad definition of what qualifies as a “low-income community,” nearly any city or town in the country is eligible. As a result, credits have been taken advantage of by Hollywood producers, Wall Street bankers, and major corporations, in what Coburn calls a “billionaire’s fantasy island.”

    “The New Market Tax Credit is a reverse Robin Hood scheme paid for with the taxes collected from working Americans to provide pay outs to big banks and corporations in the hope that those it took the money from might benefit,” Dr. Coburn said in a statement. “When government picks winners and losers, the losers usually end up being taxpayers.”

    “Washington should reduce federal taxes on working Americans and all business owners who create jobs by eliminating tax earmarks, loopholes, and giveaways like the New Markets Tax Credit,” he said.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/15/report-tax-credits-meant-to-help-poor-communities-spent-on-doggie-day-care/

    The Washington Free Beacon:

    http://freebeacon.com/issues/report-tax-credits-meant-to-help-poor-communities-spent-on-doggie-day-care-sculptures-breweries/

  5. Tina says:
    Friday, August 15, 2014 at 8:43 pm

    Dewey please explain how the American citizens that belong to AFP, or the American citizens that formed local Tea Party Groups, are not “ordinary citizens.”

    The AFP is organized. Tea party groups exist independent from one another. AFP members went home and formed TP groups…so what? They are ordinary citizens are they not?

    You seem to be under the impression that they don’t have the right of assembly and speech that are guaranteed to every citizen under the Constitution.

    Rick Santelli didn’t “push” anything. He expressed himself passionately one day on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade. What he said spread through the nation like wildfire and inspired people to organize and march on Washington…the very essence of a grass roots movement.

    It’s a shame you missed the Reagan boom…were you hiding under a rock?

    In 1990 Martin Anderson wrote about the Reagan boom in the NYT:

    Almost everyone knows that the greatest depression the U.S. ever had was in the 1930’s. It was known as the Great Depression, and its infamy merits a separate section in economics textbooks. But what was its counterpart? When did our greatest economic expansion occur?

    We just had it. And it is still expanding, setting new records with each passing month.

    We don’t know whether historians will call it the Great Expansion of the 1980’s or Reagan’s Great Expansion, but we do know from official economic statistics that the seven year period from 1982 to 1989 was the greatest, consistent burst of economic activity ever seen in the U.S. In fact, it was the greatest economic expansion the world has ever seen – in any country, at any time.

    The two key measures that mark a depression or expansion are jobs and production. Let’s look at the records that were set. Creation of jobs. From November 1982, when President Ronald Reagan’s new economic program was beginning to take effect, to November 1989, 18.7 million new jobs were created. It was a world record: Never before had so many jobs been created during a comparable time period. The new jobs covered the entire spectrum of work, and more than half of them paid more than $20,000 a year. As total employment grew to 119.5 million, the rate of unemployment fell to slightly over 5 percent, the lowest level in 15 years. Creation of wealth.

    The amount of wealth produced during this seven year period was stupendous – some $30 trillion worth of goods and services. Again, it was a world record. Never before had so much wealth been produced during a comparable period. According to a recent study, net asset values – including stocks, bonds and real estate – went up by more than $5 trillion between 1982 and 1989, an increase of roughly 50 percent.

    There are other important measures. Steady economic growth. As we begin the decade of the 1990’s, we are in our 86th straight month of economic growth – a new record for peacetime, five months longer than the wartime growth of World War II and only 23 months short of the wartime record set during the Vietnam War in the 1960’s. Most experts now predict that it will last right through 1990, and perhaps beyond.

    CATO compares the Reagan recovery and boom to the Obama recovery and stagnation:

    If in this “recovery” our economy had grown and generated jobs at the average rate achieved following the 10 previous postwar recessions, GDP per person would be $4,528 higher and 13.7 million more Americans would be working today. …President Ronald Reagan’s policies ignited a recovery so powerful that if it were being repeated today, real per capita GDP would be $5,694 higher than it is now—an extra $22,776 for a family of four. Some 16.9 million more Americans would have jobs.

    The following was excerpted from the San Diego Tribune. Unfortunately the Tribune page is no longer available but the article was shared at Free Republic:

    …Andrew Brimmer, the Harvard-trained black economist, the former Federal Reserve Board member, estimated that total black business receipts increased from $12.4 billion in 1982 to $18.1 billion in 1987, translating into an annual average growth rate of 7.9 percent (compared to 5 percent for all U.S. businesses.

    The success of the black entrepreneurial class during the Reagan era was rivaled only by the gains of the black middle class.

    In fact, black social scientist Bart Landry estimated that that upwardly mobile cohort grew by a third under Reagan’s watch, from 3.6 million in 1980 to 4.8 million in 1988. His definition was based on employment in white-collar jobs as well as on income levels.

    All told, the middle class constituted more than 40 percent of black households by the end of Reagan’s presidency, which was larger than the size of black working class, or the black poor.

    The impressive growth of the black middle class during the 1980s was attributable in no small part to the explosive growth of jobs under Reagan, which benefited blacks disproportionately.

    Indeed, between 1982 and 1988, total black employment increased by 2 million, a staggering sum. That meant that blacks gained 15 percent of the new jobs created during that span, while accounting for only 11 percent of the working-age population.

    Meanwhile, the black jobless rate was cut by almost half between 1982 and 1988. Over the same span, the black employment rate ? the percentage of working-age persons holding jobs ? increased to record levels, from 49 percent to 56 percent.

    The black executive ranks especially prospered under Reagan. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reported that the number of black managers and officers in corporations with 100 or more employees increased by 30 percent between 1980 and 1985.

    During the same period, the number of black professionals increased by an astounding 63 percent.

    AEI points out what allowed Clinton to enjoy an economic boom despite his tax increases:

    1. When Clinton signed that tax hike bill in August 1993, the economy had been growing for 9 straight quarters, including by 3.4% annually over the previous six quarters. So the economy had built up a head of steam. Today’s economy, by contrast, rose less by less than 2% last year and may end up doing no better that this this year or next.

    2. The decade saw a big drop in oil prices, from $23 a barrel in 1991 to $12 in 1998, boosting real disposable incomes.

    3. Government spending declined — meaning fewer resources as a share of the economy were being used unproductively by Washington — from 22.3% in 1991 to 18.2% in 2000.

    4. There were really two 1990s. After the 1990-91 recession, the economy grew by an average of 3.1% a year from 1992 through 1995. That’s exactly how fast the economy grew from 1965-1991.

    But from from 1996-2000, the economy grew by a spectacular 4.4% a year. This is the period that defines the decade in the mind of many people. Those years saw …

    – a big tax cut, lowering the top capital gains tax rate to 20% from 28%;

    – a big surge in private investment, particularly in the software and business equipment category which contributed a full point to GDP during those years. Did the Clinton tax hikes cause that or was it a combo of the Internet Bubble, Year 2000 preparations, the cap gains cut, and the beginning of a computer networking and communications revolution?

    I guess I look at this issue holistically. The U.S economy entered the 1990s after undergoing a huge revamp in the 1980s: marginal tax rates were lowered from 70% to 28%, the inflation menace slayed, regulations reduced, and businesses got restructured and way more efficient. Then in the 1990s, government spending and debt were reduced, investment taxes cut, and a technological revolution kicked into high gear.

    Dewey if you’re going to talk about the effects of Reagan economic policy you should at least get your facts straight. You don’t know squat about trickle down except the standard liberal talking point designed to dupe the masses. The lie delivers a great disservice to the poor, minorities, women, and the young who would benefit greatly from Reagan style policy.

    Free enterprise: Business governed by the laws of supply and demand, not restrained by government interference, regulation or subsidy

    The Kochs favor ownership by individuals with as little interference from government as possible. As a citizen you are free to buy their products or to keep your money in your pocket, buy from a competing company, start your own enterprise, or…live on berries and roots like a hermit. Freedom means freedom from controlling government elites who pick winners and losers, who coerce through regulations and taxes, and who rob the ordinary citizen of choice and his money.

    If you are going to talk about the free market you should at least understand what it is.

  6. Dewey says:
    Friday, August 15, 2014 at 11:09 pm

    Tina sorry I am done with this for the night

    I answered your question

    The Tea party is the Koch party and most people are aware of that….

    I gave the definition of grass roots. The political agenda of the Tea party is not grass roots it was provided.

    David Koch ran on in 1980:

    “We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
    “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
    “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
    “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
    “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
    “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
    “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
    “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
    “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
    “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
    “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
    “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
    “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
    “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
    “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
    “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
    “We demand the return of America’s railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
    “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called “self-protection” equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
    “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
    “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
    “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
    “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
    “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
    “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
    “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
    “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”

    http://www.sanders.senate.gov/koch-brothers

    Sorry the tea party is not a grassroots org it is the Corporate rule party… the same platform to destroy American democracy as David used in 1980

  7. Tina says:
    Saturday, August 16, 2014 at 2:00 pm

    No Dewey you did not explain. I challenged your Alinsky targeting of the Koch’s, TP, and AFP and now you shrink from your nasty targeting tricks like a guilty little boy caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

    Th Koch’s platform in 1980 was radical, I give you that. But at least it is American rather than fascist or Marxist. Radical is not necessarily bad if it delivers freedom and a greatly diminished role for the federal government. We are the United States of America not a union of socialist states.

    You can only create corporatism from a powerful central state which is EXACTLY what the radical socialist Democrat Party and the big unions want. Dodd/Frank’s draconian regulation of banks is about central control not safety for consumers. It kills the little banks and small business investors that don’t have the money to pay lawyers to remain compliant. Federal takeover of the college loan program is another way BIG GOVERNMENT has taken control of banking. Draconian regulation on coal amounts to a stealth takeover of the coal industry. Grants and federal loans to green energy start-up companies (Much of it wasted; the rest sent to China) is another way government controls, rewards, and favors companies. Reid and Pelosi made promises to the biggest healthcare insurers (AMA and AARP) to gain their support for Obamacare…corporatism at its finest! You cal it corporations controlling America but you got it ass backwards son…only the federal government can force compliance and participation…the people and the companies are held hostage!

    You claim to hate corporate power (corporatism) and yet, in your ignorance, oppose those who work to eliminate it. That’s just not very bright.

    America is NOT all of those big government departments and regulatory bodies that the Koch brothers believe should be ended.

    America is the people, free and supported by the rule of law/blind justice, pursuing happiness!

    If you are going to talk about America being destroyed you should at least understand what America IS!

  8. Peggy says:
    Sunday, August 17, 2014 at 9:37 am

    Hillary outbids the Koch brothers hands-down with her elitist demands. Really outrageous when public funds pay for all of this.

    Here’s Just a Partial List of Hillary’s Contract Demands in Addition to Her Speaking Fees:

    “What Hillary didn’t say was that, in addition to her six-figure speaking fees, there are a “few”other demands contained in her standard contract:

    ◾Round-trip transportation on a chartered private jet “e.g., a Gulfstream 450 or larger jet,” plus round-trip business class travel for two advance staffers who will arrive up to three days in advance

    ◾Hotel accommodations selected by Clinton’s staff and including “a presidential suite for Secretary Clinton and up to three (3) adjoining or contiguous single rooms for her travel aides and up to two (2) additional single rooms for the advance staff”

    ◾She doesn’t travel alone, relying on an entourage of a couple of “travel aides,” and a couple of advance staffers who check out her speech site in the days leading up to her appearance

    ◾Hillary will remain at the event no longer than 90 minutes; will pose for no more than 50 photos with no more than 100 people

    In addition, included in the contract covering the former First Lady’s upcoming October 13 speech in Las Vegas:

    ◾“It is agreed that Speaker will be the only person on the stage during her remarks”

    ◾There will be no press coverage or video- or audio-taping of her speech

    ◾The only record allowed will be made by a stenographer whose transcription will be given only to Clinton

    ◾The foundation, meanwhile, is prohibited from advertising the event on radio, TV or billboards

    ◾Clinton staffers must approve in writing any promotional material

    Not a bad gig. The once “dead broke” Hillary, while not among the “truly well off,” at least travels as if she were. All expenses paid, of course.”

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/168702-heres-just-partial-list-hillarys-contract-demands-addition-speaking-fees/

Comments are closed.