I can't say that I'm too surprised, that writing about sex, violence, politics, moral hypocrisy, et al, elicits more response from the few regular readers that I have (by my count...nine) than Terps basketball. The number of comments to the last entry indicates to me that in 2006, I need more of those types of posts, so I'll do my best.
So how about this Abramoff scandal, eh? Too bad that most of the public is so jaded about the workings of Washington politics, that it won't hurt the Republicans that badly. When your average voter already believes that ninety-percent of Congress is corrupt, is discovering that ten or fifteen members are really corrupt going to make that much impact when it comes time to cast a ballot later this year? Probably not. The larger issue, which I've never understood completely - maybe a constitutional law expert can explain it to me - how does free speech, 'the right to petition the government to address grievances' or whatever they used to call lobbying before paid agents started hanging around in the lobby of the Willard, equate to showering elected representatives with money?
Free speech = cash. Free speech = golf trip to Scotland. Et cetera. I know it's more complicated than that, legally speaking, but why? Making political gifts and donations a form of free speech just means that those who can't afford to give aren't heard by their government, simple as that. And we (we being US voters) keep voting to perpetuate this system, sure we'd like it to change, but it's futile to even try so oh well! Would more political parties help? Maybe, but I don't think Italian politics, for example, are all that corruption-free, and they have dozens of parties.
Maybe we need to pay these guys in Congress more, so they don't need to take the money. You know, Washington is an expensive town. I'm sure some representatives find that it's hard to get by on six-figure salaries alone. Then again, since you need to be very wealthy to even run for Congress these days, maybe that's not that much of an issue.
1 comment:
I don't know much about Italian politics, but what I do know can be summed up in this: They elected La Cicciolina, a former porn star.
While in the US, such a thing might be a liability for a political career, it didn't seem to overly harm hers over in Italy. Not surprisingly, she is for more objective sex education, more objective information disseminated about AIDS, anti-violence, and ecological conservation.
(I do remember being all shocked and horrified the first time I found this out, but I should mention that I was still in my Molly Mormon teens at the time.)
Post a Comment