Funds create strange, unusual bedfellows
by Bernie Scheffler, editor-in-chief

    In the wake of the Enron scandal came the WorldCom debacle. Thousands of news stories later, President Bush must be wondering who is next.

   If the economy continues its two-year slide, Bush will certainly bear the brunt of the blame from voters. But despite his questionable relationship with Enron, I keep wondering if the whole thing is really his fault.

   Truthfully, the government and corporate interests have had an incestuous relationship since long before George W. entered the public arena. I’m thinking this whole thing may have started in the Reagan era of corporate deregulation. Powerful political parties and big business have been bedfellows ever since.

   Corporations give huge campaign donations and in return politicians pass monopoly-friendly legislation.

   I know right now you are probably thinking, “What’s new?”

   Well, that is exactly my point. This is not a groundbreaking case, and until we break the ties between government and business, these things will continue to happen.

   What if Congress passed a law that said corporations, or any businesses for that matter, could not contribute money to political campaigns? After all, our government is supposed to be chosen by the people and for the people.

   I don’t know anyone who would say they are proud to live in a country where the government is chosen by corporations and for corporations, yet that is essentially what America has become. Our nation’s leaders have been bought by big business.

   If corporations were barred from donating to campaigns, politicians would not be so quick to give them what they want.

   Maybe then the government would again pass laws that protect the common American, rather than helping increase the fortunes of an already-rich CEO.

   Of course, such legislation will probably never happen because it is too late; things have gone too far.

   Why would a congressman vote for a law that would diminish his own campaign fund?