1 / 46

50 years later: In the midst of our Silent Spring moment. Then, like now, winning means beating

In 1962, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring exposed the chemical companies and government agencies for using poisonous chemicals like DDT. Carson accused the industry of spreading lies to protect their profits, and accused public officials of accepting the industry’s position without question .

erol
Download Presentation

50 years later: In the midst of our Silent Spring moment. Then, like now, winning means beating

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. In 1962, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring exposed the chemical companies and government agencies for using poisonous chemicals like DDT.

  2. Carson accused the industry of spreading lies to protect their profits, and accused public officials of accepting the industry’s position without question.

  3. “Carson was violently assailed by threats of lawsuits and derision, including suggestions that this meticulous scientist was a ‘hysterical woman’ unqualified to write such a book. “A huge counterattack was organized and led by Monsanto Company, Velsicol, American Cyanamid — indeed, the whole chemical industry — duly supported by theAgriculture Department as well as the more cautious in the media.” Source: TIME Magazine

  4. 50 years later: In the midst of our Silent Spring moment. Then, like now, winning means beating corporate special interests.

  5. 9.1%

  6. 0

  7. Silent Spring

  8. Silenced Democracy

  9. Many vs. Money

  10. public officials accepting industry’s position without question

  11. Worse than that.

  12. “I apologize.”

  13. “I apologize. I do not want to live in a country where any time a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong, is subject to some sort of political pressure that is, again, in my words — amounts to a shakedown, so I apologize.”

  14. Real “Shakedown”: Nearly $2 million in Oil and Coal Money source: opensecrets.org

  15. “serve the banks”

  16. “Service” fees: $4.7 million in financial sector money source: opensecrets.org

  17. “buyers’ remorse”

  18. 20 minutes on the phone with David Koch

  19. In America, why are we debating how much a politician cost?

  20. Outside Spending, 2010 elections • U.S. Chamber of Commerce • American Action Network • American Crossroads • Crossroads GPS • SEIU • AFSCME • American Future Fund • Americans for Job Security • National Education Association • Club for Growth • Conservative: $124,446,826 • Progressive: $37,172,920

  21. Outside Spending post-WI, OH, etc. ...? • U.S. Chamber of Commerce • American Action Network • American Crossroads • Crossroads GPS • American Future Fund • Americans for Job Security • Club for Growth • Conservative: $124,446,826 • Progressive: ??

  22. 2009-10 figures Oil & Gas: $31.7 million campaign contributions ~$325 million lobbying Securities & Investments: $102 million campaign contributions ~$200 million lobbying Commercial Banks: $22.3 million campaign contributions ~$110 million lobbying

  23. Five types: 1) Fair Elections 2) Lobbying reform 3) Shareholder approval 4) Transparency & disclosure 5) Constitutional amendment

  24. Fair Elections Under Fair Elections, the people back home would be the ones that mattered to elected officials, instead of lobbyists and big donors. Qualified candidates would not take big money from lobbyists or CEOs, and would instead receive limited Fair Elections funding from a fee imposed on the largest corporations receiving government contracts.

  25. Candidates would qualify for a limited amount of public financing by raising a large number of small qualifying contributions. Candidates continue to raise small contributions and have them matched on a four-to-one basis with additional public funds, up to a limit. Money would come from a new Fair Elections Fund which would be financed by a small fee on government contractors.

  26. Modeled after Clean Elections-style reform in Maine Arizona North Carolina Connecticut

  27. 2010 25-state field program 200 Democratic donors 350 groups endorsed 165 cosponsors in House Won in committee Votes to win in House

  28. Now under attack

  29. But passage, of any of it? So, now what?

  30. Courts Conservative Ideologues Corporate Special Interests

  31. Solutions The Fight

  32. “There are two things that are important in politics. The first is money, and I can’t remember what the second one is.” -Mark Hanna

  33. Ummm... Voters?

  34. Participation

  35. Campaigns that carry this message Super committee State budget fights ALEC Exposed Ohio people’s veto Bank actions Anti-Chamber efforts Corporate campaigns Presidential race

  36. What can you do? Add your research capacity to ours Look for ways to include analysis on the “why” Hold up examples of champions Tell us how to be good partners

  37. http://www.publicampaign.org http://www.campaignmoney.org

More Related