Ratigan With Denninger: How To Get Money Out Of Politics
Video - Dylan Ratigan and Karl Denninger on Wall street Protests - Oct. 4, 2011
Check out the website:
New op-ed from Ratigan is below.
---
Editorial by Dylan Ratigan
Three years ago, I left my 15-year career as a financial professional, because I was disgusted and disturbed by the rampant evidence of corruption in the relationship between our banking system and our government.
At the time the Tea Party was emerging and I was confident that between their exploding wave of anger and our newly minted president's soaring aspirations for all of us -- we would align to confront and resolve the blatantly corrupt relation ship between banking and our government and more broadly BUSINESS and STATE.
I was sure that the obviously aligned interests of Obama's constituents combined with the Tea Party's libertarian dogmas about money and government, that rigorous bank reforms in simple, fair and transparent way would follow. And more importantly, I believed Obama's energy and the Tea Parties would align to separate BUSINESS and STATE in order bar banks, or any other special interest from corrupting policy in a way that breaches fundamental fairness in our nation and prevents adaptation in a time of rapid change.
Their combined wave of energy was magnificent. Obama, scintillating and inspiring, harnessing a digital wave and the Tea Party, raw and rebellious screaming in unison: "We're not going to take this any more!"
Little to none of this happened and I was wrong. And I feel I must do something about it.
As it turns out, I'm not alone. In just five days, 80,000 of us have signed a petition to get money out of politics. To make this happen, we will need to grow this movement, and that starts with your voice.
When we hit 100,000 signers, we're going to do a special show on getting money out of politics from Washington DC, deliver our 100k signatures to Congress and issue what we call a "High Surf Alert." Attached to the high surf alert will be a link to a 3-paragraph letter from all of us explaining that we have signed this petition with the intent to send it to others.
This way we can harness the wave to grow our effort, lest we waste it on a bought and paralyzed government. When we are bigger we can then direct our attention at them.
I want explain to my viewers why we feel so strongly about this.
You can tell me your story in one of two ways. One, click here and leave a comment on why you want to get money out or two, film yourself talking about GetMoneyOut.com, put it on YouTube and send it to dylan@dylanratigan.com. I will use these video clips and stories on my show. I want people to see that it's not just me, that there are hundreds of thousands of us, millions of us, with one message: Get. Money.Out.
After 3 years of doing my best to marshal resources with dozens of impassioned collaborators to highlight obvious corruptions and solve problems together on TV, in person and on the Internet -- I found it doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks or does about a given policy idea -- because the entire media, and the two-party political apparatus that sets the debate is being funded by a relatively narrow group of major interests and any solution that threatens those funders is simply never discussed.
While our healthcare, educational, banking, military, energy, trade and tax policies all have great room for improvement, I believe that the events of the past few years make it clear that until we get money out of our political system, we cannot begin on any of it.
I recently learned that 94% of the time the candidate that raises the most money wins. Policy, race, gender, tie color... voice. Age all can be ignored in a candidate because -- 94% of the time the candidate that raises the most money wins.
So this past weekend when I saw the Occupy Wall Street/Occupy America protests spontaneously erupting in 60 cities, as the New York protestors heading into their 3rd week -- I decided to walk over Friday evening to Zuccoti Park to see what they were doing.
I live 5 blocks away and worked 2 blocks from the square they are in for years, this Friday was one of my first trips back to that street corner in years and I was both fearful and excited to see what was going on. I have also never been to a protest like this.
On the Internet it said their message is this:
"Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%."
They said they we non-violent, had a policy of no drugs or alcohol in the Park, and didn't allow bullhorns or amplifiers of any kind -- they communicate by repeating out loud a given speakers words in short sentences. The short sentence requirement for speakers (not easy for me!!) has the duel benefit of keeping speeches short -- and avoids that being "talked at" feeling that can result from electrical speech amplification.
When I arrived Friday there was a boisterous crowd in good spirits from all walks of life -- the hippies, young people and Tea Partiers I expected -- the old ladies and local lawyers I was encouraged to see as evidence for this groups broader appeal.
I was able to talk to different groups over a few hours and it was clear that we were in agreement. Our government is bought, and we need to do something about it. In fact, you don't have to go to Zuccoti Park or any other protest to know that!
Unrelated to any of these protests, we have started this petition to get money out. We have done so because we all agree, that until we do so, we will be prevented from engaging in the debate we all desperately need on virtually every issue to end this corruption.
I wanted them to know that I agree with them and that I support their principle, to learn from them and share with them my own efforts.
I asked on Friday if I could return the next day, Saturday, to address their General Assembly in their unusual speak and repeat fashion in Zuccoti Park. They told me if I came back the next day and signed up at 630 I could secure 5 minutes, I did so and a few hours later was granted time to speak.
"My name is Dylan. I live five blocks from here. I think you people are crazy. I love the way you communicate. The world has noticed your voice. You have been here for three weeks, and you should be very proud of what you have accomplished. For fifteen years I worked as a financial services professional. Have you guys said that yet? I can't believe I'm here talking to you. I'm here because I agree with you. I made the decision three years ago to leave the financial services industry. I did that because it was clear that the financial services industry was purchasing both political parties. I believe that the fundamental problem with our collective desire to demand the debate America deserves is that both of our political parties are funded by well-heeled individuals, because they are bought. So I have been asking myself what the hell I'm going to do about this. I have decided that I am going to devote all of my resources, whatever those resources may be, with the knowledge that the decision to devote resources is much more important than what your resources are. I believe that you and every other group of people who know for a fact that the government is bought and are making the decisions to make 2012 the year our voice will be heard. I ask myself -- what do I do with my voice? I look at myself like an angry villager. I am irate. I know that if I cannot harness my personal rage for positive change I will harm myself and not help anybody else. My question to myself has been how do I harness fire in myself? You can either burn yourself in the town square or you can deliver a single a message to your government. My message is that the government is bought. If we do not separate business and state, and harness this energy to make that the central mission of this years' election we cannot begin to do the work we have to do. Thank you for giving me some of your time and congratulations on your success. "
I agree with their principle, I don't know what will become of their movement, but I know I want to help them because I agree with them. I also agree with Ron Paul, Lawrence Lessig's #rootstrikers and millions of other disgusted and disenfranchised American's who know that their government is bought and are mad as hell about it.
In fact I think the singular message of ending our corrupt government function and the money that changes hands to facilitate it is the one goal almost every shares. Not surprisingly our efforts at aligning in a world of divisive issues makes us an underdog. Last week Politico described our effort like this:
"MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan is bent on banning money from political campaigns through a constitutional amendment, which is about as likely as the Cubs winning the World Series the night lightning twice strikes a massive earthbound asteroid."
But I believe if we approach the disparate communities with humility and shared principle, and a narrow focus, from Occupy Wall Street to factions of the Tea Party and beyond -- to offer support, debate and learning, we have in 2012 our best chance yet to end the blatantly corrupt relationship between BUSINESS and STATE.
The battle for me it has how best harness all the fire that I feel for actionable positive change.
Since I devoted myself to this issue of about how blatantly corrupt our government has become -- I feel I have tried three methods to resolve it:
1. Scream! -- It felt good to express myself, but I found it to be an intense energy that alienated people with no positive harness to direct it.2. Fight! -- This also felt good, but rarely led to any resolution or positive action.
Or 3. -- Help! Convert that rage into action everyday FOR something that is based on broad principle with a narrow goal.
I believe our decision to form this petition and use our voice to demand a real debate about an Amendment to get Money Out of politics in 2012 gives all of us something to be FOR -- and a tool that can do it. We may agree to nothing, but can we all agree to do this.
---
Related story:
Oct 4, 2011 at 11:16 PM
Reader Comments (12)
http://smokingmirrors.blogspot.com/2011/10/is-hang-banker-day-coming-to-theater.html
Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader Speak to 'Occupy Wall Street'
http://youtu.be/aKvS9MHQWno
Obama impeachment a possibility, says Ron Paul
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65035.html
http://bcove.me/lgxdt9v6
RON PAUL SENDING MONEY OVER SEAS RATHER THAN SPENDING IT ON HOME WHERE IT'S NEEDED. A Frustrated Ron Paul.
http://youtu.be/ed9ucQwNiOk
Ralph Nader Owns CNN: Ron Paul Is An Excellent Presidential Candidate
http://youtu.be/CnD-3BCqjxo
SINGLE PAYER ACTION.ORG
http://youtu.be/N-eOazoZt1g
Occupy Wall Street What the corporate media do not want you to see!
http://youtu.be/kYVG3SQBqqw
http://www.occupytogether.org
Judge Napolitano vids
http://youtu.be/N3xf56nWU0E
http://youtu.be/JViVLY_BRz4
The Long War: Are We Safer? (The longest war in American History)
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/around-the-world-abc-news/long-war-safer-161111346.html
This is the most outstanding tweet I have seen thus far.
From Twitter:
"Last night I saw a cop put a blanket on a homeless man."
---
Cheyenne
He echoes Ratigan. Congress is bought. Time for the tea party to step up and join the protests. We need prosecutions on Wall Street. It's a very good interview.
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/
This is GOOD - 2nd story down on front page.
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=195434
[snip]
Last night I appeared on Dylan Ratigan's show. You can watch the segment, and should. I used the word financialization, which a few people emailed me about and asked me to explain.
Thus, this Ticker.
So what is financialization anyway? It is the process by which something very ordinary (say, a TV set) becomes financed. In doing so there is inherently created the use (and usually the abuse) of leverage.
What is leverage? Leverage is simply the ability to act as though you have much more of something than you really do. For example, you can use leverage to pry off the lid on a beer bottle. Your raw strength is multiplied by the lever (the bottle opener) to lift the cap.
But note that there is no free lunch. While the opener may multiply the force applied to the cap, the distance the opener moves is proportionally reduced compared to the movement of your hand.
In economics, leverage is the use of debt to pretend to have more economic surplus (that is, purchasing power) than you really have.
Or like this maby..........................the strength it takes to pump a Mosburge 500-C to take a shell from the tube and put it into the barrel. Its inhearent strength making something move less than 1" up to the big long thing with a Pearl Dot way out thAre at the end, and the Brass one down-a-ways.........
Im hittin on all 8 Spark Plugs like Cheyanne tonight....................................WAIT, No realy, i think i been thAre..........
Its like when Dar has had one to many ( 6 Drinks ) and I find my self on the main floor of our Cabin at the Loft Steps, .........Ann.........can you help me up into the loft, Please.............
Its the power it takes Ann to "Extend Her Hand" and pull Dar to his feet and drag my sorry Ass up to the Loft..........Yea, thats financialization.........! If i agree to fall down in the loft, I get to receive my Cripple-Pay for another Mo.
.......Leverage is simply the ability to act as though you have much more of something than you really do...............Dose that count when I take a "Leak at Night"............?
Here is the Renew Democracy Amendment or RDA that we propose on the site http://www.renewdemocracy.org
The right of the individual qualified citizen voter to participate in all pertinent local, state, and federal elections shall not be questioned and the right to vote is limited to individuals. The right to contribute to political campaigns and political parties is held solely by individual citizens. Political campaign contributions shall not exceed an amount reasonably affordable by the average American. The rights of all groups, associations and organizations to other political speech may be regulated by Congress but only as to volume and not content and only to protect the right of the individual voter’s voice to be heard.
We recognize and fully expect that the very difficult process of attaining the level of public support requisite for a constitutional amendment is likely to be a generational project. We are dedicated to maintaining a level of commitment in the long run. It is essential that any movement toward campaign reform by a constitutional amendment firmly occupy the middle of the consensus of how to resolve the problem. A constitutional amendment cannot be feasible if it has an ideological bent and or is only palatable to one party or the other. For this reason a constitutional amendment requiring public financing of elections will never be adopted. http://www.gallup.com/poll/4765/Public-Dissatisfied-Campaign-Finance-Laws-Supports-Limits-Contributions.aspx
The Get Money Out proposed amendment does not address the second major institutional problem with American democracy. Along with the Quid Pro Quo of large campaign contributions is the predominance of party line voting and ideological adherence that the powerful political parties enforce on our representatives through their financial resources. Public financing of elections could easily only reinforce the preeminence and stranglehold the parties have on the American democratic process. How else would be publicly financed candidates be chosen except through the party bureaucracy? Few Americans realize that the individual campaign contribution is capped at $2400 but individual contributions to parties are allowed to $35,000.
.http://www.renewdemocracy.org/modules/resources/files/1441/Campaign%20Contribution%20Limits.pdf
The Get Money Out proposed amendment does not address the fact that the American voter does not have a constitutional right to vote. This fact is well addressed by the largest and most supported organization in this field Move to Amend http://movetoamend.org
. Any proposed constitutional amendment addressing voter rights and campaign reform should include a constitutional guarantee of the right to vote.
The Get Money Out proposed amendment does not allow for self-funding of a political campaign at any level. This means that it would be impossible to start a campaign without party backing originally. The RDA allows the candidate to contribute to the individual limit initially and to collect contributions from other voters up to their individual limit to initiate a campaign independent of a dependency on the party organization. Political campaigns financed by individual contributions are inherently democratic and can only survive on the strength of their message and appeal as long as the individual contributions are capped as stated in the RDA. This concept is far more in keeping with what the typical American understands as the fair and just political process. Americans have no problem with campaign contributions only those that buy influence that produces policy contrary to the public good.
The Get Money Out proposed amendment only addresses federal elections because the bureaucracy involved in federal financing of state and local elections would be tremendous. Much of the government that voters face in their daily lives is state and local and so to ignore these elections and campaign reform is an inexcusable flaw.
The provision in the Get Money Out proposed amendment to create a national holiday to vote in federal elections is obviously a well-meaning attempt to boost voter participation but it would eliminate a work day which would diminish the GDP by approximately $57.1 billion. While this is a simplistic analysis that assumes all economic activity would stop on this day, there would be a decrease in productivity of business and government, and an increase in the cost of vacation pay. A greater boost in voter participation could be created without any decrease in productivity to the economy by allowing mail in voting and or a online system of voting. A cynical analysis might claim this provision is a sop to slackers, as it is certainly unnecessary to achieve a worthy goal of increased voter participation.
The Get Money Out proposed amendment does not address a constitutional framework for legislative restrictions on soft-money political action groups with independent spending as outlined in the RDA. This is a major flaw.
Because of the importance of getting this message right the first time with the American public and because of the outlined shortcomings of the proposed Get Money Out amendment, it would be our recommendation to reconsider the proposed amendment or at least offer those supporting the concept of a constitutional amendment for campaign reform the option of choosing between the available amendment concepts. Unless it is important to stamp a personality or to control the direction of this movement is hard to understand why there is no acknowledgment of pre-existing organizations and ideas particularly when there are demonstrably superior.
It would be our hope to cooperate and communicate further in reaching this difficult but vitally important goal for American democracy
You can sign up to support our amendment and become a part of our movement here: http://www.renewdemocracy.org/support
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=224712