At their core, all the problems in this nation are ethical, and come from selfish actions by those in office. Due to this selfishness, governmental powers are being used not for the public good, but for personal gain by elected and appointed officials.
The primary symptom of this selfishness is that career politicians in the two established parties are preoccupied with giving favors to special interests in return for donations, and spending needlessly on wasteful expenditures in return for votes. For the two established parties, this favor trading is business as usual. This corrupt system makes an officeholder beholden to his/her donors, and special interests, and not the people as a whole.
The Weinergate sexting scandal aside, Anthony Wiener is the epitome of this kind of dishonest politician, and serves as the prime example of this kind of politics. According to disclosure forms for the 2008 campaign season, fifty percent of his disclosed donors were political action committees, and another forty one percent were large donors. His voting record corrugates with the interests of his donors, and the needs of the people have been swept aside.
This can be seen by his votes on trade. Since the start of free trade agreements with NAFTA in 1992, America’s trade deficit rose from 39.2 billion dollars to 559.8 billion in 2011, or an increase of over 1428 percent. The increase in this deficit was caused by the outsourcing of jobs, and the exploitation of unregulated environments and labor overseas.
Twice he voted in favor of free trade. On June 9th, 2005 Anthony Wiener cast a vote against withdrawing from the WTO, the primary international free trade agreement, and On November 8th, 2007, Anthony Wiener cast a vote that reduced trade barriers with Peru. This correlates with the interests of several large international trading companies that donated to his campaign, like IBE Trade Corp, a company that imports fertilizer made in Russia and Ukraine.
Now that he is attempting a political comeback, and running for Mayor of New York, it is possible to see where his current proposals benefit long time donors to his campaigns.
One of his proposals stands out as questionable more than the others. The first is to Move affordable builders to the front of the bureaucratic line. On the surface, it seems like a worthy proposal, but digging deeper the truth emerges.
The system to get construction projects approved in New York City is constipated, and needs some changes. This kind of proposal however favors residential builders over all others, and does nothing to fix the issue. By favoring residential projects, it pushes back commercial and industrial projects that are necessary for businesses, and increases time and costs for these projects.
A better proposal would be to streamline the regulations, and work to decrease unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles. This kind of reform would help all kinds of development without putting one type of construction project over another.
“Follow the money,” has been a mantra of investigators since the 1970s. If one does follow the money, it is possible to see that a majority of Anthony Weiner’s top contributors are real estate developers and realtors groups like the National Realtors Association, and his proposal benefits their pocket books by reducing their wait times by putting them first.
The solution to ethical problems in government is honesty. This is because an honest person will vote in a way that benefits his constitutions and the people he represents. If they were honest about the needs of the people, instead of lying for political gain, most of the wasteful spending and political bribery would not go on.
This kind of reform starts at the ballot. To reform government American voters must vote out the established parties, and end business as usual.
I am always intrigued by the debate over free trade and fair trade. What I continue to see is that tariffs benefit certain regions and industries while free trade does the same for others. While I personally see greater utility in protection, I wonder if it might be possible to offer a mixed, decentralized trade policy? Let the states choose their trade system and policies. Has anyone ever heard of such a system?
I admit, it’s a hit piece I wrote to attack AW. He will probably be the one going up against our candidate in the general election.