A Government That Is Up For Sale to The Highest Bidder

[Alan Grayson]

We don’t often quote Ronald Reagan, but Reagan once said that politics was the second oldest profession, and that there isn’t much difference between that and the oldest profession (the oldest profession being, well, you know). When a corporate PAC gives a campaign contribution, and it wants something in return, that sure seems a lot like bribery. Is it? Congressman Alan Grayson answers that question below. He’s been answering the questions posed by his campaign “sustainers” – supporters who makes monthly campaign contributions.

In a series that we’re calling “Ask Alan Anything,” if you became a monthly sustainer, Team Grayson is taking your questions to the Congressman. Today, Allison asks Alan, “What is the difference between industry lobbying and bribery? Especially when large campaign contributions are involved? I see no difference.”

You can watch the video of Congressman Grayson’s response here.

Congressman Alan Grayson: Good question -- What is the difference between industry lobbying and bribery? In fact, only an artificial one. One is legal; the other one is not – and nobody knows why. We scratch our heads when we think about it. It’s very hard to understand.

The fact is that campaign contributions are just as necessary to most Members of Congress as their food, their rent, and their mortgage payments. They need them in order to survive in office and, in fact, they make all sorts of compromises to do so.

It’s a fact. You can look it up. It’s a fact that you can trace, one-to-one, the contributions that specific companies give to Members of Congress and the tax breaks they receive. You can trace, one-to-one, the specific contributions that Members of Congress receive from companies and the no-bid contracts they receive. In fact it is a huge problem, and maybe THE problem.

A lot of people think that the central problem that we have in Washington, D.C. today is the way we finance our campaigns. A $10,000 check to many Members of Congress, nominally for their campaign committees, are things that they are desperate to receive, and they are willing to do almost anything to get. And that’s a big problem.

I’m proud to be the only Member of Congress -- one of 435 -- whose House campaign last year successfully was financed mostly by small contributions. That’s right: (there are) 435 of us, and I’m the only one who actually made his campaign work by getting most of our contributions from people who gave $200 or less.

How do we do it? We do it this way: We reach out to people. We reach out individually. We make sure that people understand that I’m fighting, every day, for justice, equality, and peace.

In the long run, people will understand this situation is unsustainable. We have, in essence, a government that is up for sale to the highest bidder.

But I want you to know that whether you give $10, or $25, or $50, or $100, whether you are a monthly sustainer who gives $10, or $25 or $50, whatever that might be, what you’re getting in return is not a bailout, what you’re getting in return is not a tax break, it’s not a no-bid contract or regulatory relief. What you’re getting in return is someone who will fight against all of that, and somebody who will fight for you. Somebody who will fight for the common good. That’s what I’m here for.

Congressman Grayson – maybe he’s not one in a million, but he is one in 435. The only Member of the House of Representatives whose 2012 House campaign was financed mostly by small contributions. The only Member whom you can count on to be unbought, and unbossed. That’s what we need in Congress. See the video. And if you aren’t one already, then become a monthly sustainer today, to make sure that our voice remains heard in Congress.

Hab Dich Lieb (“We’re fond of you”),

Team Grayson

He saw my complications,
And he mirrored me back, simplified.
And we laughed how our perfection,
Would always be denied.
"Heart and humor, and humility,"
He said, "Will lighten up your heavy load."

- Joni Mitchell, “Refuge of the Roads” (1976).

[Scuba]

1. K&R

[DJ13]

2. K&R

[Wilms]

3. ^