There are strong reasons for believing that what to us appear the worst features of the existing totalitarian systems are not accidental byproducts, but phenomena which totalitarianism is certain sooner or later to produce.
Incentives matter.
I consider it a miraculous accident of history that our U.S. Constitution was created during the time of Adam Smith, he of "the invisible hand." It was Smith's observation that the collection of players in a free market acting individually in their own interests had the counterintuitive effect of regulating themselves and each other. Those ideas gave our Founding Fathers the wild notion that personal self interest might be harnessed to create a system of government in which liberty might endure. So they settled on a structure with three separate branches on the theory that each branch defending its own turf would act as a check on the others and prevent any one branch from acquiring too much power. For more than 200 years it has worked, more or less.
Times have changed, and the invisible hand is no longer an effective limit on government power. With our separate branches having less interest in competing with each other than in cooperating to extend their powers, it's government pursuing its own interests at the expense of the people.
When Donald Trump first campaigned on draining the swamp, we had no idea how big the swamp really is, and it's clear in retrospect, neither did Trump. But when he unexpectedly beat its anointed candidate in 2016, the ferocity of its retaliation gave a glimpse of the swamp's true dimensions. The next four years of Russian collusion, Mueller investigation, impeachment, and other hoaxes featured the CIA, DOJ, and FBI in a multi-pronged attack on the outsider.
The swamp includes a vast network of political action committees, multi-national foundations, think tanks, academic institutions, multi-national corporations and financial institutions, media outlets, non-profits, and federal agencies. In fact the swamp is so far reaching that it seems preposterous to believe there is such a thing. How easy to dismiss it as a wild conspiracy theory. Who could believe it?
But then 75 million Trump voters watched as the 2020 presidential election was stolen, and the media in lockstep simply denied that it happened. No crack investigative journalists were on the case. Coverage was suppressed. Mention of the stolen election on social media was censored. In the midst of it all a very unexpected thing happened.
Time Magazine published an article describing the coordinated election theft as a grand and noble conspiracy to "save democracy" from the "authoritarian" Donald Trump. People and organizations in and out of government conspired to "fortify" the 2020 presidential election by promoting mail in voting, absentee ballots, expanded early voting, loosened requirements for voter identification, to name a few of the conspiracists' strategies. Time said it was all to prevent voter suppression and guarantee a fair election. In reality the fix was in for Joe Biden.
They all might have gotten away with it, but Trump's support so far outpaced expectations that in the wee hours of election night, vote counting had to be halted in key counties of several battleground states. It seemed more Biden votes had to be manufactured and counted out of sight from poll watchers. The fraud was obvious. A narrative had to be established and Time Magazine got the "scoop" with its "noble conspiracy" theory to explain what a good thing the fraud was. How did America come to this?
I find clarity in seeing the swamp, first, as a market. Conspiracy became the natural outgrowth.
Strange as this may seem, I see a key similarity between today's situation and the oil crises of the 1970s. Americans who were alive in the 60s and 70s may remember the cars lined up waiting to buy gas. Lines stretched out into street and down the block as people waited to fill up before the gas stations ran out of gas. What people may not remember is that the crises, two of them, were both caused by congress having set maximum legal prices on oil. Ronald Reagan finally won the economic argument, and the price ceilings that caused the shortages were removed.
A maximum legal price makes it more difficult, sometimes impossible, to profitably sell whatever it is that is subject to it. The low price discouraged supply, but had the opposite effect on demand. Not only did American drivers see no reason to curtail their driving, decades of low fuel prices had discouraged the design and production of fuel efficient American cars. Demand for gasoline remained high while supplies were kept artificially low. The classic example of a shortage.
For a snapshot of today, look to the recent runoff elections in Georgia where the campaigns for four Senate candidates spent somewhere north of $830 million, averaging $207,500,000 per candidate. Meanwhile, the salary for most senators and congressmen is $174,000 per year. Contributors are buying something, taxpayers are buying something else. Who wins that contest? Congressional salary levels are set by law. In my book that qualifies them as a maximum legal price, but what is it causing a shortage of? Taxpayer representation maybe?
A recent poll shows that congressional approval ratings are in the toilet. Only 25% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, and that's up from 15% in December. Meanwhile 71% disapprove. Americans want representation and good government, and they aren't getting it.
You might say it's a bear market in representation, and a bull market in the political influence. But the bull market is an illicit market. Sure, it's a legal market, but only because the market makers make the campaign finance rules. Today's congressional influence market has some similarities to the black market in booze during Prohibition.
When Prohibition made booze illegal, an illicit market in alcohol was immediately created. Organized crime stepped in to fill the need – or maybe crime stepped in and organized to fill the need. Either way, in with them came the large and sophisticated supply chains, the corruption of many local government officials, and bloody gang wars. A turning point came with the St. Valentine's Day Massacre, when Al Capone's gangsters disguised as cops gunned down some of Bugs Malone's gangsters in a Chicago garage. Something had to be done, but the fact is, gang wars over booze distribution didn't end until Prohibition was repealed.
The swamp is analogous to organized crime and the paid-for-officials during Prohibition. In the place of mob supply chains for booze, an elaborate campaign financing legal structure has evolved that says who may bribe whom, and who may not, and how they must go about reporting their bribes. The ready supply of influence creates its own demand, and the influence market has gone well beyond campaign finance. In addition to the purchasing power of the campaign contribution, there are opportunities for delayed compensation with jobs after service and speaking engagements. For those still in office, generous book ghost writing and publishing deals are a way to launder huge rewards for "services rendered." The swamp has become an industry of international proportions whose mission is to direct the flow of U.S. federal dollars in massive amounts.
There is a climate industry that takes in billions annually. The sun is shining for green industry initiatives. There are grants large and small by the thousands. There is foreign aid, administered by favored non-government organizations. Think tanks get money to study things, and schools get money to indoctrinate. There is no end to the money handed out by our federal government, and for the influence buyers that money is their return on investment in our elected officials and sometimes our unelected officials.
The 2020 election ought to be considered today's St. Valentine's Day Massacre moment. The unthinkable has happened, and nobody has been willing to stop it. Half of the nation is in the grip of a national hysteria that denies any election fraud and elevates a riot into insurrection and treason.
Something has to be done. But what do we repeal? How do we bust up an influence racket in Washington that has gone global in scope? Since no one in the swamp can be expected to shut down the gravy train, the solution has to come from the grass roots through the states – a series of constitutional amendments.
I have some suggestions on what they might be:
- Campaign finance amendment to establish central management and reporting of all federal campaign contributions and expenditures for maximum transparency. I envision a kind of blockchain system like a cryptocurrency. Disallow contributions of any kind from any organization, allow contributions only from individuals. American citizens could contribute as much as they like to as many candidates they like. There would be a starting date before which contributions are disallowed, say two years before election day, and an ending date after which contributions are disallowed. Election day could also be the end date. Leftover campaign funds would become property of the federal treasury. All contributions and expenditures would be publicly reported. Illegal and laundered contributions would be considered bribery or treason for both the donor and the receiver with severe penalties imposed. Minimum penalty of prison time, maximum the death penalty.
- Congressional reform amendment to put congressional pay in line with Fortune 500 CEO pay and at the same time make the acceptance of outside income for elected officials and their family members illegal. Such illegal income during the time of office and for five years afterwards would be considered bribery or treason for both the donor and the receiver with severe penalties imposed. Minimum penalty of prison time, maximum the death penalty. Elected officials should owe allegiance to taxpayers, and taxpayers should pay them for it.
- Eliminate the income tax. Our income tax is a model of government intrusion and surveillance. It is also justification for any and all redistributionist schemes. Alternative taxation can be by tariff as it had been in the past, or a national sales tax. Tax consumption rather than production. Getting this amendment is a long shot, but it's worth a try. At a minimum extending of tax free status for foundations and other organizations should be outlawed.
- Eliminate public sector labor unions, or any organization that negotiates on behalf of federal employees at any level. Labor negotiates with public sector unions pit government labor and management on one side of the table against the taxpayer on the other, with the result that the taxpayers are unrepresented.
The purpose of all of the amendments is to cut off funding of the swamp. Some of these ideas may seem unrealistic, or impossible to achieve. Or it may seem that the proposed amendments won't accomplish their purposes. Comments and any other ideas for draining the swamp are welcome. I plan to elaborate on the proposed amendments in a future post.
