Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Super Senate Sweep?

By Molly Ivins, AlterNet. Posted June 23, 2005.


The drumbeat of this administration's giveaways to big corporations continues: tax breaks for the undeserving and more green lights for the exploitation of the environment.
Ivins

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also by Molly Ivins

Molly Ivins AlterNet Archive
An archive of the great progressive columnist's writings.
Jun 21, 2007

Stand Up Against the "Surge"
We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders and we need to raise hell.
Jan 12, 2007

Now They're All For Bipartisanship
Apparently, the people of this country did not elect liberals to Congress last week. Nope, they elected populists!
Nov 15, 2006

More stories by Molly Ivins

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

As that great American, Deep Throat, never said, "Follow the money." (The line is by William Goldman, who wrote the movie, All the President's Men). Keeping your eye on the shell with the pea under it is not easy when the right-wing echo chamber continually takes up new chapters in the culture wars -- the dread case of the senator who didn't, in fact, say the United States is as bad as the late Soviet Union and the equally grave perennial constitutional amendment to prevent the menace of flag desecration.

Meanwhile, largely unnoticed and unreported, the drumbeat of giveaways to big corporations continues: unnecessary tax breaks for the undeserving, more green lights for the rampant exploitation of the environment, and all manner of theft and skullduggery.

Seriously, this administration is starting to look like that old television show in which contestants lined up their shopping carts in a grocery store and, on the signal, began running around throwing every valuable item they could find in their carts. Whoever grabbed the most high-priced items won. The contestants here and now are corporations and lobbyists.

The amusing case of the congressman whose house was bought by the founder of a defense firm for $700,000 more than it was worth is being exceptionally well-reported by the congressman's hometown paper, the San Diego Union-Tribune. You will not be amazed to learn the congressman in question (Randy Cunningham) oversees the committee that grants contracts to that very defense firm.

The story gets better by the day -- the congressman lives on a yacht in D.C. owned by the defense contractor, and employees of the defense firm say they were threatened with firing if they did not give to the company PAC. Well shut my mouth!

Meanwhile, the Senate has endorsed the Bush administration's do-nothing policy on global warming by approving a measure that avoids mandatory reductions of heat-trapping pollution. These are the same bozos who refuse to require better mileage per gallon from the auto industry, even though the technology is readily available.

The Senate also passed an inventory of offshore oil and gas resources, apparently a step toward drilling in coastal waters that are now off-limits to the oil companies. See above reference to bozos. Now here's a jewel of a giveaway to those deserving citizens, the tobacco companies. The Justice Department suddenly dropped its request from $130 billion in the long-running tobacco case to $10 billion. Justice Department lawyers say political appointees at the top of the department were responsible for the decision.

The tobacco industry contributed a total of $54.1 million in individual, PAC and soft money from 1989 through last year, according to Capital Eye, a newsletter put out by the Center for Responsive Politics. Seventy-five percent of its contributions have gone to Republicans. In addition, the tobacco industry has spent hundreds of millions on lobbying over the same years. In 1998, the tobacco companies settled with several states for a reported $246 billion. Individual states have won settlements larger than $10 billion, yet the federal government is apparently planning to run a national anti-smoking campaign on a fraction of that. One expert witness for the government said he had been asked to change his testimony on how much such a program would cost, but refused to do so. This action has several names -- sell-out, cave-in, giveaway and payoff among them.

When this administration's Department of Interior promises you that increased grazing on public lands will improve the quality of rangelands, do you believe it? Would your answer be influenced by news that once again the advice of scientists in the field was ignored by the political appointees in charge?

A government biologist and a hydrologist, both retired from the Bureau of Land Management, said their conclusion that the proposed new grazing rules might adversely affect water quality and wildlife, including endangered species, was excised and replaced with language justifying less stringent regulation.

"They rewrote everything. It's a crime," said one of the scientists. The ranchers are happy about the proposed new regs, but how happy are they going to be when the rangeland deteriorates?

And how many times are we going to let the administration get away with just changing science to suit its own political purposes?

The R's have passed an energy bill that increases our dependence on foreign oil by 85 percent by 2025, according to a 2004 report by the Energy Information Administration. No wonder the White House has to keep changing the science in these reports.

One striking feature of the bill is a nifty little waiver for the manufacturers of MTBE that lets them avoid liability suits filed since September 2003. MTBE is a toxic substance now working its way into various water supply sources. The waiver is worth billions to the manufacturers of MTBE, who happen to be clustered in the home districts of Majority Leader Tom DeLay and Texas Rep. Joe Barton, who is chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Surprise!

Digg!

Molly Ivins writes about politics, Texas and other bizarre happenings.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Lawdee, Lawdee, add in the Supremes
Posted by: dancerkc on Jun 23, 2005 2:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Heck of a list. It goes beyond paraphasing Lily Tomlin's declaration about cynicism. Words like low, bottom and worst just get lower, bottomer and meaner and meaner every day. And goll darn it they like it.
Today we can add the supreme court - buying into the totally stupid claim that rich people bring jobs. I've never yet seen a company built for the purpose of creating jobs (outside of enterprises like Goodwill). Jobs to them are just one more expense item, like furniture, and let the low bidder win. Thanks to the Supremes it is open season for every big corporation to come steal all our land and other property. As the Bryant character tells Harrison Ford's Decker in Blade Runner, in order to stop-loss the "old blade runner" - "you're little people now, not cops..."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New World Order
Posted by: treehuggingliberal on Jun 24, 2005 12:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Down is Up,
Up is Down
Right is Wrong
Wrong is Right...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hierodule
Posted by: Hierodule on Jun 24, 2005 5:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And the Supremes, re: eminent domain, have now told us that "public" (use, that is) really means "private."

Will our homeowner's insurance policies have to be changed to include a new threat?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why are we just sitting here taking it?
Posted by: packofwolves on Jun 24, 2005 6:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you Molly Ivans for keeping us informed on the crimes being committed against the American people by these disgusting politicians. I'm wondering why we aren't demanding ethical behavior by those we elect to represent us? When politicians break our trust and commit crimes against us, why aren't we demanding that they be held accountable? And please tell me why we keep electing these scumbags back into office? If our politicians and the operation of our government wasn't so devastating, this would seem like a slap-stick comedy. Think about it, those politicians and this administration are out of control and we're all just sitting here watching them rape our counry, steal our hard-earned money, and send our sons and daughters off to die in a war that the Bushies wanted for their own personal victory. I guess we deserve everything we get because we are electing these jokers into office and then allowing them to screw us over time and again. This administration is out of control and will be the ruin of us if we don't do something about it. The people who are running this country care more for lining their pockets with our money than the welfare of this nation. The saddest part of all this is we just sit back and watch them do it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» How they get re-elected Posted by: Bic Pentameter
And in spite of all those Republican failings...
Posted by: Linette on Jun 24, 2005 7:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...they continue to get elected into office.

How do they do it? I think James Kroeger explained it best in The Republican Nemesis

"Republican strategists know they would rarely win if election results were always determined by a logical discussion of The Issues and nothing more (they know that most voters would benefit more from Democratic economic policies than from Republican policies). They know they must win the Image Campaign to have any chance of winning. That is why they are committed, now and forever, to NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING. Republicans have never forgotten a key stratagem they perfected during the Reagan Era: DEMONIZING YOUR OPPONENTS WORKS."

"The most important reason why negative campaigning has worked so well for the Republicans is because their negative attacks on the Democrats create a positive impression of Republican candidates, who appear—in contrast—to be individuals who do not possess the defects that they have accused others of having. They define themselves [positively] by defining their Democratic opponents [negatively]. On a visceral level, what the Republicans actually “stand for” in the minds of Swing Voters on election day is that they are not Democrats—those defective people who seem to have been born to ruin everything…"

Kroeger's article really is must-reading for every Democrat.

Linette

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And with all of those failings, Molly...
Posted by: Linette on Jun 24, 2005 7:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...why do the Republicans continue to get elected?

I think James Kroeger said it best in The Republican Nemesis:

"Republican strategists know they would rarely win if election results were always determined by a logical discussion of The Issues and nothing more (they know that most voters would benefit more from Democratic economic policies than from Republican policies). They know they must win the Image Campaign to have any chance of winning. That is why they are committed, now and forever, to NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING. Republicans have never forgotten a key stratagem they perfected during the Reagan Era: DEMONIZING YOUR OPPONENTS WORKS."

"The most important reason why negative campaigning has worked so well for the Republicans is because their negative attacks on the Democrats create a positive impression of Republican candidates, who appear—in contrast—to be individuals who do not possess the defects that they have accused others of having. They define themselves [positively] by defining their Democratic opponents [negatively]. On a visceral level, what the Republicans actually “stand for” in the minds of Swing Voters on election day is that they are not Democrats—those defective people who seem to have been born to ruin everything…"

Kroeger's article really is must-reading for every Democrat.

Linette

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ms
Posted by: Confidence Stimpson on Jun 24, 2005 7:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In her column of 23 June, Ivins cites a 2004 report by the Energy Information Administration that says the Republicans have passed an energy bill that increases our dependence on foreign oil by 85 percent by 2025. Does anyone know how I could get a copy of this report? Thanks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MOLLY IVINS FOR PRESIDENT 2008!!
Posted by: Bob Doublin on Jun 24, 2005 9:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She's smart,she's hilarious,and she's compassionate.She knows the domestic scene and foreign affairs better than most politicians.We've got 3 years to build the movement.If a failed B-movie hasbeen can do it,why can't someone like her?Just her openness and understanding about what women go through surviving breast cancer both medically and in the matter of adequate health insurance would get millions of votes

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Biblical Commentary
Posted by: MatheMagician on Jun 24, 2005 11:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again, Molly has cut through the smoke and mirrors of the "so-called" mainstream media and given us her marvelous blend of information and commentary. I'd like to add a bit of biblical commentary from I Timothy 6:6-10:

But godliness with contentment is great gain.
For we brought nothing into [this] world, [and it is] certain we can carry nothing out.
And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.
But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and [into] many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.
For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

"Love of money" could equally well be translated as "profit motive," and that seems to be one of the major motivations of this administration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Clear the Decks"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jun 24, 2005 12:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Molly:
"And how many times are we going to let the administration get away with just changing science to suit its own political purposes?"

Answer:
As many times as can be crammed into a future populated with a dumbed-down electorate, one that knows more about "American Idol" contestants and Britney Spears' underwear than they know about how the world works.

If any group set out to design a strategy for making a population stupid and self-centered enough to be rolled by any bullshit-spewing charlatan, they could not do much better than what we have now: pop-culture overload, "news" as low-brow soap opera, and an educational system with little or no science education.

Why do we "let them get away with it?" WE DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER! We don't know what to believe, because our science education – which, by teaching reason, logic, and the need for proof, gives us functioning "crap detectors" – is lacking. So we believe what "the authorities" tell us, because up until recently, we could count on (most of) it being accurate. We're simply not accustomed yet to having our trusted leaders systematically lie to us about everything, including the basic workings of the natural world!

And we don't have the time to seek the truth: We skitter around just trying to figure out how to get through our days – days that contain less in help and resources, and far more in energy-wasters: screw-ups, traffic, computer failures, cell-phone failures, unpaid overtime, deadhead customer service, junk mail, sales calls, etc., etc. This leaves little psychic energy for anything else – like, reacting to our government's schemes for cheating its population.

At the same time, we now have a government populated with crooks that don't give a damn what we think, because they know that if they spend enough on advertising (with money they get from corporations they "grease the wheels" for), voters will reelect them just because they are already there – the "knee-jerk" incumbant vote they can depend on.

What's the answer? Beside moving to a civilized country, like Canada, I can think of only one: vote the bums out –– vote ALL the bums out! Send a clear message about who holds the ultimate power in government, get rid of all of them, and start over. We're sinking fast, as an economy and as a culture. It's time for a radical change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Clear the Decks" Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: "Clear the Decks" Posted by: underledge
» RE: "Clear the Decks" Posted by: Sparks56
It's time for reform - Again
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Jun 24, 2005 12:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is not a panacea, but campaign finance reform would help. The huge return on investment of campaign contributions make them the best investment in the world. Millions in contributions are repaid with billions in favors. If you would like to consider a plan in which campaigns are paid for by the taxpayers and the funds are controlled by the voters go to:
http://www.lincolninitiative.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gas And Oil Inventory.
Posted by: nakis on Jun 25, 2005 7:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That little part of the energy bill, this is what Greenpeace has for information on that little bit.

Seismic blasts have a decibel level of 260 - that's more than twice as loud as an ambulance siren! Whales, dolphins and other marine mammals rely on their sense of hearing to navigate, to locate food and to communicate with each other. Exposure to this level of sound can cause deafening disorientation and can lead to permanent damage, brain hemorrhaging and even cause entire pods of whales and dolphins to beach.

Our research found that an average modern 3-D seismic survey requires a blast every 25 meters or every few seconds as the ship cruises along. Calculations based on this rate of seismic blasts find that it would take at least 285 million seismic blasts to inventory the entire OCS including Alaska, which would require 176 million blasts alone. Surveying the Pacific Coast OCS would take 40 million blasts, the Atlantic Coast OCS would require 43 million blasts and Florida’s Gulf of Mexico coast OCS would take 12 million blasts.

The issue regarding the waste, corruption and abuse is no less important.
I just wanted to expand on the issue of what they are going to do to the wildlife in the coastal waters.
Right now the fish populations are dramatically down. Fishermen can no longer find the fish in the size and quantity they used. Over 20 years ago the Connecticut river was dirty with waste and pollution but the clean up brought the salmon and shad back. But now they are back down in numbers. It's not the river. It's the populations in the oceans that are being overfished so that adults don't come back to spawn.

This little bit of siesmic testing is going to further damage the coastaly ecosystems. Just how greedy and stupid can our government get?

I'm betting even greedier and stupider.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

we need a real opposition party
Posted by: timg98376 on Jun 25, 2005 9:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bushies are, it should be no surprize, charging ahead with their extremist political agenda, periodically throwing crumbs to the religious right which is responsible for their election.

The real problem is that there is no organized political opposition, the Democratic party is impotent, as it moved closer and closer to big business it lost any connection it ever had with working people.

The question is do we need a new, third political party or can the decaying corpse of the Democratic Party be somehow revived. Personally I think a new party - a Green Party?, a Labor Party? - is needed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

rockpicker
Posted by: rockpicker on Jun 25, 2005 9:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..."Down with all of the ruling class!
Throw the whole legislature
out on its ass!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

March on Washington?
Posted by: Sojourner on Jun 25, 2005 1:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have no one in power who can cast the first stone. We put them in office, and so they are following the current version of the American Dream: Take the money and run. (Even the political opposition practices that.)

It is only domestic disorder in the form of open social conflict that gets their attention. (It's not good for the stock market.)

Passive resistance works when enough people come together to demonstrate their determination.

Washington, with few exceptions, is not listening. We need someone like Colin Powell to apologize to the American people for becoming GW's shill.

I'm glad that comments on this site continue to remind us that we are not yet down for the count. The times are so dangerous that the temptation is to predict disaster. It's possible, but not yet. We need a voice that must be heard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: March on Washington? Posted by: KAT1291
Thank God for You, Molly
Posted by: ragmachine on Jun 26, 2005 10:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is good to know there is someone in Texas with your clarity of vision and honesty!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RepubliCONS...
Posted by: Mar on Jun 27, 2005 1:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...continue to "win" elections because they say exactly what angry, white men want to hear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When will it hit home?
Posted by: elfrijole1 on Jun 28, 2005 6:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm just wondering when it will click with regular people that our future has been given away to corporations, and that neither party is really representing them anymore. It seems like a lot of folks just don't even care. What will be the breaking point for the American people?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PeterPeter
Posted by: PeterPeter on Jun 28, 2005 1:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How does one go about impeaching the President of the U.S.
I think he is mad, irresponsible, he lies, he outrages the scientists by rewriting their reports and twisting the results to support his policies, he is wrecking this country, day by day. Don't you all see this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: PeterPeter Posted by: COC