Elites Rule, Not You: When Bipartisanship Becomes Undemocratic - HuffPo

[WillyT]

Elites Rule, Not You: When Bipartisanship Becomes Undemocratic
Richard (RJ) Eskow
Consultant, Writer, Health Analyst
Posted: March 2, 2010 08:05 PM

<snip>

At what point does "bipartisanship" begin to erode the democratic process?

Here's my answer: When it's used to take decision-making power away from voters and place it in the hands of a governing elite - an elite which acts in secret so that its members cannot be held accountable to anyone for their actions.

Democrats traded away some of the most critical elements of health reform for bipartisan comity that never appeared - and yet didn't bring those elements back when the other side of the aisle rebuffed them. Now they appear to be doing the same thing with financial reform.

I'd like to know if my two Senators are in favor of a strong and independent Consumer Financial Protection Agency or not. That will help me decide whether to support their re-election. Yet if Senators Dodd and Corker have their way, I'll never get to find out. They'll work out their deal in private, either with the tacit support of the Administration and the Senate leadership or not (I won't know that either), and voters like me will never know where their Senators stood on this important issue.

Did you know that under Dodd/Corker it would be hard for individual states to enforce stronger consumer protection rules those set by the Federal government? One reason you might not know is that there's been no public debate of the Dodd/Corker compromise. "Bipartisanship" sometimes means keeping the public in the dark.

Here's how democracy's supposed to work: One politician stands for a certain set of ideas and values. Her or his opponent stands for others. We, the electorate, choose between them. But apparently this model of governance is considered too inefficient and messy in some circles. The current "bipartisanship" vogue would end the interference of all those meddlesome middlemen - the voters, that is.

In the New Bipartisan Order Washington elites get to decide what will be debated publicly and what will be decided privately. Any ideas that might require politicians to take controversial positions are hashed out behind closed doors and then presented as a "bipartisan" solution (after, of course, having been ritually blessed by David Broder and other cheerleaders).

It's time to give the proper label to this new, fetishized version of bipartisanship: It's an ideology. It's a new philosophy of governance that challenges our current system. Not so coincidentally, it also serves the interests of those promoting it, strengthening those currently in power and weakening the influence of voters and political outsiders.

<snip>

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/elites-rule-not-you-when_b_483282.html

:kick:

[Autumn]

1. K/R

:kick:

[asdjrocky]

2. They are in the club.

It's a club we will never be in. People have to understand, when these people call each other friends, they mean it.

[bvar22]

3. Painfully Obvious!

* Would you favor or oppose the national government offering everyone the choice of a government administered health insurance plan — something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get — that would compete with private health insurance plans?

Favor 82%

Oppose 14%

Not Sure 4%
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010010320/poll-shouts-message-massachusetts-voters-were-sending

The CEOs of the Health Insurance Corporations ARE "in the club".

What about Americans who Work for a Living?

Hahahahahahahahahaha!


NOW we have Your Children’s Money too !!!
And there is not a fucking thing you can do about it!
Now THIS is “Bi-Partisanship” !
Better get used to it!!
Hahahahahahahahaha!



The only option left is to tear is all down and start over.