For_Progressives Posted 5/16/2008 2:51:47 PM Beginning with the Dan’l Webster quote: “Justice, sir, is the great interest of man on earth. It is the ligament which holds civilized beings and civilized nations together.” I have just heard speak the man responsible for launching the Freedom of Information Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act; federal agencies such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Environment Protection Agency (EPA), and Consumer Product Safety Administration. Looked at dispassionately, that’s a pretty impressive amount of legislation, and it ALL seeks to achieve the kind of governance I’d want from a Federal Government. It was a breath of fresh air. Ralph Nader had just addressed Google, who are making noises about sponsoring open, televised debates in the fall. Obama says he’s willing to debate Nader, and I think it is imperative to expand dialogue to include someone who can create legislation, who knows how to set policy. As Ralph said, “Functioning democracy demands participation.” I am aware that, neither a suffragette nor an abolitionist were elected president, but it was their kind of organized political will which forced the two-party system to accommodate progressive change in America. Calling on the electorate to “reassert our sovereignty,” Nader blasted Democrats (calling for pressure on John Conyers) for failing to introduce articles of impeachment. In openly refusing to get court approval for domestic wiretaps – a federal offense with a substantial penalty – Nader says Bush has already confessed to at least two felonies. Instead, Congress debates giving retroactive immunity to ATT for providing email, web surfing and phone records to the NSA before a case can be brought to trial. In his most chilling moment, Nader said we are two terrorist acts away from losing all of our civil liberties, so ready are citizens willing to capitulate on issues of civil liberties, such as the right of habeas corpus, rights of free assembly and freedom from warrantless search. Nader distanced himself from McCain by his own adamant opposition to ‘tort reform,’ which - despite the name - includes provisions that limit citizens’ rights of redress, particularly in cases involving corporate wrongdoing. Jury-mandated injury settlements lead to workplace safety, product safety and other qualities of life in a system of ‘checks and balances.’ Nader called for increased prosecutorial budgets, particularly aimed at white-collar crime. The taxpayer bailout of Bear Stearns bank and collusion with the privately run, Federal Reserve Board who failed to oversee sub-prime mortgage lending were offered as evidence of systemic control of government activity by corporate interests. A theme. Saying, “Clinton never saw a weapons system she didn’t like,” Nader distanced himself from both Democratic candidates desire to increase ‘defense’ spending. I remember Nixon running successfully for re-election on the same plank he had in his first term: to end the war in Viet Nam. At $14,000,000 a day, continued occupation is unacceptable. After prosecution for the unconstitutional acts that precipitated our involvement, Nader will engage in reparations. (Did you know that a desire for an ‘authorized party’ in oil contracts was the only reason the Navajo nation were allowed to create a Tribal Council?) Nader considers Obama & Clinton’s positions on increasing our military budget obscene: military spending already represents half the Federal budget (and the actual costs of financing the war are outside those numbers… funded by deficit spending which will enslave our children’s earning potential). Rolf and I recently figured it would take more than three centuries, non-stop, to count to a billion. A $9.3 trillion-dollar debt is unimaginable. Though 80% of that debt was racked up under Republican administrations, its reduction is not currently open for debate. Nader discussed the pernicious effects of speculation and a desire to tax the five trillion dollars that flows out of our bank accounts every night to move through different currencies while we sleep. No matter what Obama says about wanting change, he will attempt to do so within a framework financed by corporate interests. Nader called for ‘civic indignation’ at the influence of 35,000 lobbyists and ten thousand political action committees. That Cheney can leave government, serve industry and return to government is representative of the revolving door between the authors of legislation and those who benefit from it. Who actually writes our dense legislation? Who does it serve? I am quite familiar with Nader’s point about letting corporate interests (posing as lobbyists or legislators at whatever point in their morphic careers) undervalue public property. From mines to forests to airwaves, Big Business sets the standards and reaps the rewards from their use. I did not know how much research, done at public expense (from NASA and atomic energy to publicly funded colleges) ends up as commercial products … returning nothing to cover the costs of development. Nader broached a topic I find sensitive: de-regulation of the pharmaceutical companies. As a JNJ shareholder, I am fearful of podium-thumping cries that we must eliminate excess profits. Luckily, neither Clinton nor his predecessors bit the hand that fed their campaign chests. Nader informed us that the taxpayer-funded National Cancer Institute developed the drug Taxol. A patent was then let to Bristol-Myers Squibb for commercial development. BMY now charges $14,000 to treat women with ovarian cancer. (web reference) The cost of manufacturing Taxol, according to Love, is about $500 per patient for an eighteen-month treatment regimen. Bristol-Myers Squibb charges more than twenty times that amount, thus earning between $4 million and $5 million a day on Taxol. 16 In 1999, the drug generated an estimated $1.7 billion in sales for the company. (end of web reference) In a private moment, Nader referred me to the work of James Love (Rutgers, Princeton) who prefers “donors and governments should consider prizes as an alternative to marketing monopolies as the reward for successful investments in R&D.” Corporations would recoup their development costs by obtaining prize money: consumers would have low-cost treatment. I guess the prizes would be lower than the billions in revenue, and drug industry profits would decline. I find it the current monopoly pricing practices distasteful, and seek a reasoned solution to spiraling health care costs. More people will die this year from lack of health care (18,000) than homicides, and Nader is fully behind single-payer insurance (along with 59% of doctors). Any attempts to bring insurance industry to the table in designing a health care system of the quality Europe derived when climbing out of the rubble from WWII would be like inviting the problem into the solution, he said. Nader reported that 5800 people will die this year in the workplace (more miners died on the job in the 20th century than US soldiers in WWII), tens of thousands will succumb to poor air-quality, and that 200 Americans a day die after being infected by hospitals. Ralph Nader knows how to engineer for safety and health, and like the canary in your mine, his ability to get solutions onto the table are a good indication as to whether you are in a democracy or corporate-dominated state (one aspect of fascism). He claimed a hundred million lives have been saved since his demands for auto safety. When Ralph stepped forward, auto crashes were the leading cause of death in a massive age group, killing 45,000 Americans annually. Nader opposes corporatism. Congress came ‘round to him partly because GM ‘operatives’ were caught trying intimidate him (in the building) prior to his testimony: a Federal offense. Since learning that Jefferson, Washington and Adams had all read Cicero, it sorta came as no surprise when Nader quoted him: “Freedom is the participation in power.” Dictatorships allow freedom: who to marry, where to go bowling, etc, but true freedom requires greater access to the initiative process, the courts, the ballot, and open debate. Given the long-term trends of erosion in personal income and mounting debt (when a CEO can earn in fifteen minutes what his secretary will earn in a year), and the recent shunning of personal liberties, the stakes are high. Vague promises and hack solutions (like waiving bridge-building gas revenues for three months) demand the infusion of rational, practical and transformational policies that Nader can bring into public dialogue. Nader, like all very bright minds, can see connections that aren’t apparent to most. Links between Ethanol and food prices; between NAFTA and job loss and environmental degradation (Four secret WTO court findings have declared American environmental protections to be in violation of ‘free trade.’); between arms manufacturing and failure to heed the Israeli people’s call for a two-state solution; between corporate tax credits and the loss of purchasing power through the export of our manufacturing base. He quoted Eugene Debs: “The people can have anything they want. The trouble is, they do not want anything. At least they vote that way on election day.” The distinctions between the two major parties have grown so small that, in order to preserve what is actually due the American people, we must go outside the box of the status quo as presented by commercial media (completely beholden to corporate interests). There are systemic problems in governance. The best interests of The People have fallen abysmally far below those of multinational corporations. “The failure of Democrats to adopt progressive policies are the nose ring by which they hand their tether to corporate interests,” he declared when most virulent. I hope you will bring Ralph Nader into your thinking. It is your civic duty to consider his positions. My favorite quote was, “I don’t know why the Democrats don’t adopt our agenda: I send it to them every week.” Those with historical perspective will see his positions on health care, minimum wage and the like are old Democratic positions, espoused by Truman, Roosevelt and, to some extent, Johnson. Nixon moved on the EPA, NOAA, SSI, minority-owned businesses and handicap legislation only because he could hear marching in the street. The demise of any kind of domestic pressure on government has come at great cost. Ralph said I was ‘lunching’ on the sacrifices made by my ancestors during the American Revolution if I were not to be in someway involved in a redress of my current grievances. So I started a blog. Get Nader on your state's ballot. He'll hold the Democratic nominee's feet to the fire. Nixon was able to open the door to China because, as a hawk, no one could call him soft on communism. Nader can give cover to Obama, 'forcing' him to accommodate progressive values. (0) Comments

Archives May, 2008

Calendar

Blog Categories All Categories

General Comments Please login to post a comment.