16. MERCENARY POLITICIANS

It has been common knowledge for many years that America has the best Congress that money can buy. Moreover, the mark of a good politician is not that he can be bought, but that once bought he stays bought. The mercenary nature of politicians should not be viewed primarily as an issue of their individual morality. More pragmatically, the important issue is the stealing and selling of the American Dream through the law process.

In legalizing inflationary income for the few, the mercenary politicians are mandating inflationary suffering for the many. No one bribes a politician without expecting to receive a monetary multiple of the bribe as a result of the politician doing the special thing. In other words, the briber receives more income than his production justifies: inflationary income. These mercenary politicians are crooks, and as Mark Twain said, they are a distinct class of American criminals.

Events of the past decade have twisted the consequences of mercenary politicians. In the first two centuries of America, mercenary politics involved law-makers legalizing inflationary income for other Americans. This legisflation worsened, however, when America started running trade deficits (monetary colonialism), especially through petroleum price-gouging by foreigners--OPEC.

One example of mercenary politicians selling out to foreigners was Koreagate in which officeholders accepted bribes from Korean agents in exchange for sponsoring laws that favored Korea. ABSCAM showed how the mere prospect of OPEC dollars could grease the willingness of the politicians to sell favors for foreign dollars. Only one of the contacted politicians outrightly rejected the foreign requests and bribes.

The consequence of trade deficits and OPEC price-gouging is the accumulation of many dollars outside the U.S., i.e., euro- and petrodollars. These funds come back to haunt the American citizen in the form of bribes, contributions and lobbyists that compete for the ears of our mercenary politicians. As the size of these funds have increased, the politicians have listened less to American problems and have responded more to the whims and greed of foreigners. As a result, America has less freedom from the time-cheapening problems of life; rather, fordom (foreign domination) is on the rise.

Obvious Fordom: Paid Lobbyists

Fordom exists in many forms; Koreagate and the implication of Abscam are only two of the more obvious ways in which mercenary politicians have succumbed to foreign domination and have short-changed America. Equally obvious is the role of ex-politicians who become lobbyists for foreign powers; this means they are not "re-presenting" the problems of Americans when they use their influence to call old buddies on Capital Hill.

Clear-cut examples of mercenary politicians abound, and each administration adds to the existing crop; for example, the Carterites began "cashing in" after their defeat in 1980, and they primarily re-presented foreigners. One prominent example of a politician selling out to foreign interests funded by OPEC dollars was a former Secretary of State (Muskie) who "expects to earn $750,000." Three Arab emirates are some of his clients who supposedly pay "real money" meaning big bucks. Perhaps OPEC would not have so much "real money" if Muskie's competence had been better when he was a Senator on the Foreign Relations Committee back in 1973. Regardless of his competence, will Muskie do anything today to harm his Arab connections? (Muskie on Foreign Relations Committee?)

The Democrats are not alone in sucking at the spigots of foreign cash. The news weekly that described the foreign riches of the Carter crew--U.S. News and World Report--reported a few weeks later on the bipartisanship nature of how foreign lobbyists operate in Washington. A sense of foreboding is probable as one reads about the ex-politicians in the pay of foreigners.

For a regular reader of this news weekly, a sense of deja vu can develop, for the listed names is a virtual repetition of the names that were listed in the annual series run each spring by the news weekly on "Who Runs America": Clark Clifford, William Colby, William Fulbright, Wilbur Mills, Williams P. Rogers, James Symington, and Paul Warnke to name just a few. Would one be wrong to conclude that the service to foreigners by the past power elite of America is a disservice to the U.S.? Are these former elected officials selling out America?

The foreign intimacy of former politicians goes all the way to the top: "Former President Gerald Ford is on the board of directors of Sante Fe International--that helped the deal go through speedily." The deal, in this case, was the purchase of Sante Fe by the Kuwait Government. This is the same government that told the U.S. government not to reveal the extent of their landholdings in America or they would cut off the oil flow. The "gotcha by the jugular" dictation will increase as more politicians re-present foreign interest. The present mercenary nature of our present and past politicians is reminiscent of the carving up of China into "spheres of influence".

One thing to keep in mind is how politicians don't think their own little "pork barrels" really cost the nation that much. However, when an increasing percentage of past and present politicians represent the foreign domination of America, the little sins add up to less American freedom. The mercenary politicians don't distinguish between representing American interests in foreign countries and representing foreign interests in dominating America.

When ex-politicians become lobbyists, they are not selling problem solutions for the nation as a whole. If they were national problem-solvers, they probably would not have been defeated in their last election. Ex-politicians sell influence, that is, they buy the time of other politicians for a special few. As a result, the national problems are ignored or multiplied by mercenary politicians selling their time to the highest bidder.

Gerald Ford, besides his role in the Sante Fe takeover by Kuwait, has had other roles that can be described as influence rather than acumen selling, e.g., employment as a director at the Shearson brokerage firm. Really, Jerry was hired solely to provide direct assess to his old buddies on Capital Hill. Jerry's financial intelligence was not enough to guide the nation away from stagflation or from Jimmy's arms. Jerry's influence, however, is quite helpful in generating financial giants, e.g., the Shearson taxfree merger with American Express., Ford may not be able to walk and chew gum at the same time, but he sure is digesting a lot of domestic and foreign money as he sits on boards of directors.

Complex Fordom: Revolving PR Crews

Ex-politicians arguing foreign interests over domestic well-being becomes obvious when they are registered lobbyists. Equally obvious, but unappreciated, is the inherent disposition of politicians whose personal past and future is tied to the growth of foreign, not domestic, businesses. For instance, more important than Richard Allen's interview "payment" was his public relations firm that represented Datsun automobiles.

In light of the duplicity in not selling his PR firm long before Reagan's inaugural and in continuing to receive payments after his new job in the White House, Allen probably impeded rather than furthered the Reagan Administration's trade negotiations with Japan. Was Richard Allen left dangling in the wind because of a watch and a $1000? Or, would extended analysis of Allen's financial connections have drawn attention to similar connections of other people in the Reagan administration, e.g., Deaver, Casey?,,

Consider the action of the Reagan Administration toward both Taiwan and Central America. Whereas certain American segments have argued for quotas on shoe imports from Taiwan, the Reagan administration has repealed existing quotas. This action--counterproductive to American jobs and well-being--should be expected in light of how the public relation firm started by Michael Deaver who represents Taiwan.

Deaver is one of the three persons in Reagan's inner circle of personal advisors. Deaver' public relation firm also represents Central American businessmen. Is there a connection between Reagan's acquiescing in the economic injustices of Central America and the past/future employment of Deaver? In other words, does our foreign policy represent what is best for America or for Deaver? You can bet that Deaver will never argue for a policy that will stop the economic price-gouging and legisflation that is at the core of the revolutions in Central America. In fact, he'll probably pitch for economic/military aid that will benefit his clients first and foremost.

More ominous than Deaver's commercial connections are the common business interests of Reagan's Secretaries of State (George Schultz) and Defense (Caspar Weinberger) who were the president and a vice-president for Bechtel Corporation. Bechtel not only depends heavily on foreign construction but has pursued a "foreign policy" of its own; before becoming head of U.S. foreign policy as Secretary of State, Schultz urged attempts by Bechtel "to create more favorable attitudes toward its clients among the American public." Will either of these revolving door politicians (each served in previous administrations) ever do anything to curtail the trade deficits which fund their lucrative private employment? To what degree will the national interest suffer as a result of their mutual private interest?

Mercenary politicians harm America not only here but abroad. In the name of Americans, they support corrupt governments that export cheap goods obtained through sweat-shop and slave conditions. Whose production is undermined by the import of these cheap products? America. Ironically and tragically, most blue-collar workers have a knee-jerk response to Reagan's promise of increased world-wide respect through military assistance to foreigners. Whose personal wealth benefits by representing corrupt, foreign interests? The average worker who suffers job loss? No. Mercenary politicians benefit.

Without election reform, we shall continue to have "mercenary politicians." Mercenary politicians are policy-makers who sell out to the highest bidder. There is no conspiracy, just a problem-ignoring confederacy of dunces following the same modus operandi--bucks, bucks, bucks. It used to be, however, that mercenary politicians only compromised the national interest for the special interests of a few Americans. Now, politicians are increasingly molding the course of America to benefit foreign interests.

Warning: Anyone found stealing lifehours will be forever banned from participation in and rewards of Better Democracy and Capitalism.
 Homepage
 Index