|
Edited on Sat Oct-16-04 08:32 PM by ReadTomPaine
A Kerry Presidency won’t mark the end of right wing dominance in politics unless the Administration is willing to attack the infrastructure that supports, funds and promotes radical conservative values.
It’s the morning of November 3rd, 2004 and John Kerry has won the Presidency by a comfortable margin, giving the executive branch a reasonable mandate to pursue its policies. The Senate is now in Democratic hands, albeit by a slender majority. Progressive Democrats across the nation breathe a collective sigh of relief. Our long national nightmare has ended.
But is it really over? What will we have gained if the systemic problems which caused this political illness aren’t addressed point by point and eliminated? History is bitterly clear on this matter, you can pick whatever era of politics you choose and the answer is the same. For any kind of lasting impact, a Kerry victory will need to be backed by a tough, openly aggressive domestic policy that cracks down on every aspect of conservative encroachment in modern American life.
I’d like to examine what such a course might resemble for the Kerry Presidency. It is a course that more closely follows his instincts as a prosecutor, BCCI investigator and Swift Boat captain rather than solely on his years as a consensus deal maker.
Cleaning House – Regime Change meets Home Improvement
First order of business starting in late January would be the public dismissal of all Bush appointments, starting with high profile individuals such as Porter Goss and Tom Ridge. All ideologically driven executive orders and supporting programs made during the previous administration would be revoked or have their funding eliminated. This should be a fairly exhaustive process; Bush appointments have been numerous and many will be running silent after a shift in power. Additionally, a comprehensive audit should be performed to see exactly where so much of the public’s money has been funneled via these appointments and pet projects. Once the public starts to get a sense of the level of fraud they have been exposed to, the mandate for an investigation will grow along with their anger. This will be a key factor in enabling and empowering the legal scrutiny that will follow in this and other areas.
Since the Bush Administration has made such a point of enshrining and framing its relevance in the history of the Presidency, every measure should be taken to erase these efforts. This cleansing should go so far as to include redecoration of sections of the White House changed under the previous administration and the removal of all pictures, photos and references to Bush’s Presidency in the vanity galleries constructed for him during his period in office.
Then, in grand public ceremony, reopen the White House and surrounding grounds as they used to be. Drop the canvas screens, move the concrete barricades and checkpoints. Have television cameras there in the 'People’s House' during this process so the citizenry can see firsthand these symbols of our national troubles being dismantled and discarded. Take the tarps off of the statues in the DOJ. Get the snipers off the White House roof. Wipe the fear away from Washington.
Included in this recasting of the government’s image would be a new name and slightly different mission for the Department of Homeland Security, perhaps to the Department of Internal Security or the Office of Counterintelligence. Bush’s Presidency should be framed as the black hole of modern US politics – a poisoned tree from which nothing good will grow.
This process should be purposefully reminiscent of the ancient practice of erasing reviled rulers from history and will serve the purpose of rebuilding the confidence among allies that things have well and truly changed. It will also make the GOP nervous, and rightly so given what would be coming next.
Scaring them Straight – Kerry the Prosecutor
John Ashcroft should be the very first member of the previous administration to feel the bite of justice. Any investigation into the DOJ’s operations under his stewardship would yield immediately prosecutable offenses, and given Mr. Ashcroft’s key role in enabling the malfeasance experienced during the last four years, no efforts should be spared in pursuing all charges to their maximum penalties. Given the hostility engendered in the Law Enforcement community and among DOJ career officials by his management style, there will be no shortage of first hand accounts of the many abuses which have occurred.
An excellent way for the newly restructured Department of Internal Security to earn the respect of the people would be to have them lead this aggressive investigation and make an example of Mr. Ashcroft to illustrate what occurs when the public trust is violated. Putting him in federal prison for a decade or more will go a long way towards achieving that goal with a single gesture.
Next on the agenda is setting the stage for the long awaited reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, rewritten to cope with the media realities we face today. Instituted via executive order, it would be preceded by a series of high profile, criminal investigations into media collusion with the previous administration and the GOP. After appointing an independent prosecutor, Kerry should publicly step away from this and allow this investigator to assume full responsibility for the case. This will serve to firewall Kerry from what happens next.
When the investigators at the independent prosecutor’s office discover national security matters are involved, the Patriot Act would be invoked and the individuals under scrutiny would become the full beneficiaries of the law’s many provisions. This group would include, but not be limited to, recognizable radio, newspaper, television and cable personalities, their controlling executive managers and their handlers in the Republican Party. If asked, those in charge of the investigation should simply refer to previous case law or Patriot statues on the matter and suggest that if they don’t want the government holding citizens in this fashion they should petition Congress or the President to change the law. Otherwise all queries should be met with a stone wall of silence.
While this is being pursued, the Kerry Administration should simultaneously push for the law to be re-written in a less restrictive manner, or scrapped entirely. With people like Bob Novak and Carl Cameron answering questions at undisclosed locations, there won’t be any serious disagreements from either side that the Patriot Act was a mistake or with getting reformed legislation voted into law by a comfortable majority. With progressives leading the effort, Kerry and the Democratic Party would take the credit for the Patriot Act’s change into a useful tool rather than a civil rights disaster, while at the same time giving a lesson in proper respect for the law to those who need it the most, using the very tools being reformed, as a warning never to turn this corner again. There is no better way to learn the danger of playing with fire than feeling the touch of flame.
Once this investigation has completed its purpose the executive order updating the Fairness Doctrine would follow. It would cover all areas of news media including cable, radio, webcast and network TV. Additional measures such as new ownership limits, ombudsman requirements, enforced separation of management from news reporting departments and similar safeguards would be included.
There would be an independent organization that monitors adherence to this doctrine and the penalties for willful infractions severe, involving revocation of FCC license, loss of broadcasting rights for a substantial period and possible forfeiture of studio assets in extreme cases (think RICO). This should be invoked against FOX News at the earliest opportunity, and used shut them down. Sinclair Broadcasting may also be an easy target.
If Democrats have enough muscle in the House and Senate, momentum from this victory could be used to get a bill with the new Fairness Doctrine on the legislative agenda and made into permanent law on a fast track. This would be an excellent means to unify congressional Democrats more closely by withholding further party support for those rightward leaning representatives who stray from a yes vote. Those who do can be opposed by other, high profile, loyal Democrats during the next election cycle. It’s long past time Democrats who show a preference to cooperate with the GOP learn the lessons of party unity.
Smoking Them Out
This will be a critical point. To insure that similar problems don’t recur with this same contingent of conservative ideologues there will need to be an effort to roll these people up and prevent them from either holding office or attempting to influence policy in the future. Several options exist here, but the most promising high profile means remain the recently revealed spy scandal involving AIPAC and the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame.
With Democratic executive control over the Justice Department and threats to stop the practice of foreign lobbying on the hill, Israel’s Likud government could be persuaded to disclose the appropriate information to prosecute the inner, neo-conservative core of the Bush Administration. With Sharon losing his lifeline in Washington and becoming a pariah in Israel, he will be eager to cut loose his former compatriots for some goodwill with sitting Democrats, who have traditionally been Israel’s strongest supporters. Shedding neo-conservatives from his coat-tails would absolve Israel of much in the eyes of some Americans; it’s a price I think Sharon would be glad to pay. This outcome would serve the additional purpose of distancing the religious right from Israeli politics, a worthwhile pursuit.
Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith would be primary targets, with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld possible but unlikely prizes as well. Bush himself would be hard to touch via this route, but if the right information appears, he’s also in play. An expanded Plame investigation could also serve a similar purpose and exposes both Cheney and Karl Rove to prosecution with the right Attorney General at the helm. Given the current state of the Fitzgerald investigation, this may already be occurring.
Bush may escape direct criminal involvement but his political career will be shot by the imprisonment, Nixon style, of his inner core of confidants. An additional outside means to discredit Bush may be usage of the courts in the Hague for a war crimes trial or a close look into election irregularities here in the United States.
Speaking of elections, the next action would be a federal investigation into the myriad cases of Republican voter fraud going back over the last four years, with the 2000, 2002 & 2004 periods being the specific focus. The purpose of these investigations would be to shine some sunlight on situations in swing states where elections have turned on questionable results or have confirmed registration irregularities. If Bush has an Achilles heel with regards to prosecution, this is it.
This phase would be fairly easy to initiate, as plenty of evidence and public interest exist for the first set of indictments to be issued. GOP voter suppression tactics, election officials & contribution organizers would all be targets, eliminating the 4-10 point ‘fraud bounce’ Republicans enjoy while busting up the network of money donors to the party via fear of indictment and implication in the scandal.
Ralph Reed & Karl Rove would be of special interest here, with their self professed election tampering and intimidation tactics coming under a microscope. This investigation could easily widen to include the electronic voting machine industry, law enforcement and military (ROTC) collusion in vote suppression and a further examination of media cooperation with party officials.
Republican symbol-appointments such as the congressional seat given to Kathleen Harris would also make ideal targets for prosecution, as her arrest and incarceration would be a powerful symbol indeed. Jeb will most likely have to wait until 2006 for his defeat, unless revelations compel him to step down.
Think Tank Trouble – The TOW Initiative
Once the above cycle takes place, the next phase is an executive order which legally defines think tanks as active, fully recognized wings of the party with which they are affiliated. Dubbed the ‘Take on Washington’ or TOW Initiative, think tanks would be deemed ‘virtual candidates’ in the same manner that corporations are deemed ‘virtual citizens’. They will become subject to the most restrictive campaign finance laws in the nation and forced to operate under transparency rules and donation limits similar to those of a candidate running for office. Hard limits on maximum yearly budgets, advertising restrictions near elections and so forth should be in full effect. Meetings should be open to the public, broadcast on C-Span, have transcripts available, etc.
No one working at these organizations would be allowed compensation greater than standard salary for a congressional representative and full disclosure would be required for any members who write political articles, etc. in the mainstream press. Those with a proven history of political malfeasance would be barred from participation or financial contribution. Groups found in serious breach of these rules would have their assets seized and liquidated.
After this is put into effect, it should be used immediately against several of these organizations with pre-planned attacks ready to roll the day after it’s signed. At least one of these, such as the Heritage Foundation, should be dissolved as a result of investigation - a warning that the days of ‘business as usual’ are gone for conservatives.
As above, a secondary legislative track should accompany this to make it law. From the start this bill should be pork laden for the other side, a time honored tradition to make sure GOP greed overcomes conservative ideology. It would also be tendered as a package deal – all or nothing. Any Republicans who balk get their pork servings struck from the bill or are assured a Kerry veto, depending on the balance of power in the committee. This will serve the purpose of keeping the bill’s integrity largely intact and making Republicans pressure other conservatives to pass the legislation, as recalcitrant lawmakers would be stopping the flow of cash to all districts as well as their own. By building acrimony between conservatives, this allows the bill to have value even if it fails.
Any remaining holdouts would bear the retributive brunt of redistricting attacks and well funded election year battles in their home states. Additionally, messages from Democrats should make it clear these recalcitrant Republicans are denying their constituents significant benefits for opposing popular legislation and nearby, surrounding districts should get an extra helping of federal aid so the benefits of voting with the President are clearly illustrated. As the former bill was designed to unify Democrats, this would be used to divide Republicans.
Lastly, these gains should be solidified with a series of bills that widen freedom of information requests, reform campaign finance laws, improve transparency in government operations, mandate a verifiable voting system with a hard paper trail, close redistricting loopholes and require that Congress fulfill their role as the gatekeepers to declarations of war, perhaps by making abdication of this responsibility a criminal offense with mandatory prison time. The overbearing legal weapons which arose during the Bush Administration, after their use in dismantling the right wing infrastructure of corruption, must be beaten back into plowshares so they can no longer be used after this period of reform.
These ‘sunshine provisions’ and the changes they bring would be protected from future repeal/abuse by Supreme Court appointments that openly and unapologetically favor a progressive agenda. Thurgood Marshall is a good model here, as we are sorely in need of such a steward in our time. Persistence would be the key to this fight and critics to these nominations should have placed against them the full weight of a unified Democratic Party, the Senate, the White House and whatever other political means are available to persuade them that obstructing this process is not in their best interests. These appointments may be the hardest fight of all.
Message to the Future
Far more dangerous than President Bush himself is the path he has laid open for future demagogues who will no doubt be more intelligent and adept at public and media manipulation then he and his advisors. Contemplate for a moment where we would be today if George W. Bush were given just the single advantage of Tony Blair’s verbal elegance and persuasiveness.
Moreover, the breathtaking speed and completeness of this takeover has opened our system’s weaknesses and flaws for the entire world to see. In the short space of five years, the GOP was made the instrument of a small, fringe group of political ideologues who then successfully took control of the government and the media via the Presidency. The legal and political mechanisms that have permitted this to occur must be either repaired or dismantled beyond future use.
It must be made clear to the people of the United States and the rest of the world that the door is forever shut on this era of American politics. It is not simply for the sake of reassurance that this must be done. The sleeping demagogues who have been awakened by the scent of blood and power running rampant in our Capitol must also be given a message and sent back into shadowy slumber.
This will take symbolic gestures, hardcore legislative change and the cauterization of the powerbase of the far right. None of these things can come about via incremental, conciliatory steps – the time for such passive actions passed in the early 90’s. It took radical political action from the far right to get us in this state of affairs, and it’s going to take similarly drastic political action to undo them.
There will come a time, years hence, when we will all be called out and held accountable for our actions today. For the things we have done and the things we did not do. The eyes and ears of tomorrow, of history, will give us a hard glance. The questions will be difficult to answer. You can, in fact, feel the scrutiny and hear those questions today, if you look and listen hard enough. Like a final judgment, the answer will be your legacy, your epitaph. What is it going to say?
RTP
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
