Text – Page 61 – Citizen Reporter

Followup On Money

Next week I will move beyond the US elections, but so long as the big media does such a poor job of looking behind the show, I feel the need to bring forward whatever information I feel is of importance.

Some months back my internet colleague Chris Weagel recommended a media source to me, by the name of consortium news. I’ve subscribed to that site, and have indeed found useful information that is not available in the mainstream.

The latest eye-opening article went over Hillary Clinton’s income, on the heels of her 5 million dollar loan to her own campaign. Some people may not be surprised or remotely uncomfortable about the numbers, but I want to lay it out anyway.

According to author and journalist Nat Parry, Hillary’s income breaks down like this:

Senate salary of $169,300 a year.

From her memoir Living History, 9.9 million$

$10.2 million for giving 57 speeches in 2006

And then there is husband Bill’s money coming from such places as:

$20 million via business relationship with Yucaipa Cos., the investment firm of his longtime supporter, billionaire Ron Burkle, which has connections to the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum. – according to the Wall St. Journal

Helped Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra in securing a lucrative uranium deal with the repressive government of Kazakhstan in 2005, shortly before Giustra made an unreported $31.3 million donation to Clinton’s foundation. – according to the New York Times.

This is just a taste, read the full post for details as well as links to the sources.

Seeing these numbers just makes me do a double-take, as sometimes I forget how very wealthy politicans in the United States can be; especially if they’ve lived in the white house.

Response to the Money

D-Rock knows campaign finances… and he shows some of that in yesterday’s comments. In response to my bought and sold numbers which I admittedly threw together coursely, he had the following to say, which I thought is worthy of highlighting in its own post (extra attention to the last part where he talks about what happens to all that money Giuliani got) :

Well, that’s not quite the whole story

The numbers you reference are from total individual contributors in each sector. When you see “Goldman Sachs” $407,000 that’s what individual employees of the company choose to give to a candidate, and there are limits to what each individual can give. I believe that number is $5,000 per candidate.

A cooperation or union can not give money to a candidate from their funds so you’re bought and sold for line is a little misleading. Corporations and unions can give money directly to candidates through a Political Action Committee – though Obama hasn’t taken any money from PACs. 99% of Obama’s money came from individual contributors 25% of which are under $200.

So when there’s a title that says “insurance and real estate x millions of dollars” that means the millions of people that gave money to candidates marked “insurance and real estate” as their profession on the FEC form. That does not mean that the “insurance and real estate” CEO in his “insurance and real estate” company headquarters just wrote a check for x millions of dollars to a candidate.

Later on he added:

The US fed budget is 3 trillion a year, so a few hundred million ever four years to have some access to that seems like a reasonable investment.

Is there too much money in politics? Sure…I guess, maybe not enough of our money.

Case in point – If Nader had his way and had everyone that made minimum wage give his campaign $10 he would be the most powerful political figure in the US. Would we say there is too much money in politics if that was the case?

The two best things to curtail some of the spending is to lower maximum contributions and increased transparency. I’m not sure where EU parties get their income (prob public funding) but the FEC transparency of political contributions is outstanding. You can search by name, zip code, industry etc. Your link to opensecrets.org says it best.

Questions like can the government prohibit you from spending your own money on a political race? See Corzine

Or, what if you raise millions and out spend your opponent 100:1 but your contributions can from small donors?

The biggest problem right now is the double dipping by contributors to increasing amount of PACs and Leadership PACs – that’s a long story.

Oh man I loved watching Rudy 9u11iani fail like a fat kid doing pull ups in gym class. He actually set the record of the WORST campaign ever recorded he spent something like 50 million and got 1 delegate. His left over money can be given away to other campaigns or the national party. But I think he spent everything he had

Money Trail

You might be inspired by this year’s US presidential election, so forgive me for disturbing the good vibes. Like all elections in the US, this one has already been bought and paid for…

Goldman Sachs

Hillary Clinton: 407,000$ +

Barak Obama: 421,000$ +

Mitt Romney: 223,000$ +

Citigroup

Hillary Clinton: 350,000$ +

John McCain: 153,000$ +

Morgan Stanley

Hillary Clinton: 362,000$+

Mitt Romney: 152,000$+

Securities and Investment

Hillary Clinton: 5,828,000$+

Barak Obama: 5,295,000$+

Mitt Romney: 4,141,000$+

Insurance and Real Estate

Hillary Clinton: 15,131,000$+

Mitt Romney: 11,686,000$+

Barak Obama: 11,591,000$+

Law Firms/Lawyers

Hillary Clinton: 11.756,000$+

Barak Obama: 9,521,000$+

John McCain: 2,508,000$+

Energy and Natural Resources

Mitt Romney: 731,262$+

Hillary Clinton: 704,000$+

Barak Obama: 619,000$+

Follow the money trail yourself…

Antarctic Research

I’ve been collecting articles about the antarctic, for future use in podcasts relating to what is happening there. While my interest is in the nations with competing claims over pieces of the antarctic, I’m also interested in how global warming is speeding up the ice melting there and what happens as a result.

One story I read today, was about the animal known as “pink gold” or “krill”, which is abundant in Antarctica. According to the article, Krill are:

small shrimp-like crustaceans which with modern technology can be used in fish feed, human dietary supplements, soya sauce flavoring, pharmaceuticals, or even to clean the paintings of Old Masters .

The list of uses and benefits of Krill go on and on, and well worth reading. But there is also a great danger that they are being overfished, which brings a whole other list of problems for the antarctic ecosystem.

Another issue is invasive species. Wherever you live you certainly come into contact with some type of invasive species; plant or animal life that is not native to your area but was introduced somehow and becomes overwhelming to all others and in turn damages the ecosystem.

In the case of Antarctica, scientists and tourists have apparently unknowingly caused invasive species to appear there. Even the smallest of moss or mold, or even rats coming off visiting ships, are a huge risk to Antarctica which is known for never having experienced any type of major invasive species.

The learning continues… related podcast coming soon.

Great MLK Talk

It has been some time, since the show changed format, that I was blown away by an episode of Radio Open Source. They’ve been doing alot of arts related interviews, they being Chris Lydon, and I’ve felt the show has lost its global conversation feel. But nevermind that, today I was riding my bike from the University of Amsterdam and I almost forgot where I was… as the interview Chris did was really that powerful.

His guest is a gentleman named Michael Haynes, who had a special relationship with Martin Luther King Jr, and founded a church with him in Boston. The man has tremendous insight into MLK and his philosophy. Often times, when someone starts on about what MLK would say about the state of the US today, it is almost cliché…. and empty. But not in this case… Haynes had me rewinding and listening again and stopping just to consider what he said.

I strongly recommend you take some time from all that is so important in your daily routine, or maybe just pop this onto your mp3 player instead of that Radiohead album you’ve been listening to over and over again. In fact, if you happen to be a teacher, make this one a special lesson this week. It is better than any history book, I can promise you that.

On This Oz Day

January 26th is Australia day, and what a good year to talk about the land down under, where changes are taking place that have caught my attention in a positive way.

Prior to his election, I confess I didn’t know much about the new Australian PM Kevin Rudd. Observers in and around Australia said that he was different, a man who would shake things up… they even called him an environmentalist.

Obviously time will tell how much he is or is not the real deal when it comes to an Australian leader who challenges the status quo. But in the last month he has already gotten my full attention, especially when he formally apologized and re-enforced the plan to pay reparations to Aboriginal people in Tasmania.

Throughout the 18 and 1900’s, aboriginal people of Tasmania were subjected to diseases and sicknesses brought over with European settlers. Between 1800 and 1833 their population decreased from 6,000 to 300. Later other attrocities would take place, with children of aboriginal people being taken away from them by the government, or when a christian missionary promised a safe place to live on another island for the remaining people, and when they arrived they were left to their own devices, once again facing starvation, disease, and death.

Which a history like this, seems rather insulting to celebrate Australia day. But what I’d like to do instead is celebrate some overdue positive steps in Australia, towards coming to grips with history, as well as the present. Not to mention, finally electing leaders and adopting policies that reflect an compassionate, forward thinking, and mature society.