The Opacity of Hope

This is how the Money waits, and reasserts itself, and maintains control of this crashing machine that is our industrial world:

  • Expecting reform of financial regulation in the wake of the financial meltdown that almost destroyed the economy of the country and the world? Right. As Steven Pearlslein writes in today’s Washington Post, “the current system of financial regulation has been thoroughly captured by the companies it was meant to restrain.” Moreover, by deploying the vast campaign contributions¬†at their disposal, they have no intention of allowing the Congress or the Obama administration to spoil whatever the next bubble/crash is going to be.
  • Waiting for health-care reform to bring down the medical costs that bankrupt a million people a year (half of whom have insurance) and extend affordable insurance to the millions who do not have it? Wait on. As The New York Times reports this morning, the Democrats who control the Congress are losing their nerve under the combined onslaught of the howls of “socialized medicine” and the threats from well-heeled contributors. The combination succeeded in taking single-payer health insurance off the table before the election, leaving on the table something called the “public option.” A half-measure, this would instead of providing everyone with non-profit medical insurance, would allow some to choose it. As The Washington Post reports this morning, the Senate draft of the “reform” bill has in it no provision for the public option.
  • Hoping that President Obama, with his unprecedented ability to win election with small donations, will change the Money Culture that controls Washington? Dream on, or read this report on how a dream gets killed, in today’s New York Times.

Need any further evidence that the ability of our government to deal with crises has been strangled by the people who caused the crises? Stand by.

Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The Opacity of Hope

  1. jonolan says:

    Yes, and also remember that the dark side of those “small donations” is that election finance laws do not require them to be scrutinized and reported to any form of oversight group or committee.

    Obama, according to reports from the Libyan government, received millions in small – sub $200 – donations from the Libyan people. If true, then one must assume that many other foreigners did the same thing.

    I know that Obama’s campaign refused to report on these donations – as they were legally allowed to do – when questioned about them.

    I’m not saying that there was malfeasance per se, but it did highlight this potential problem with those small donations.