A History of Liars: The American Politician (Volume One)

This is the last in a three-part series.

Alan J. Yeck

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

This is the mother of all corruption. First, understand that ‘Citizens United’ is not an organization that actually wants citizens to unite, or is looking out for your best interest. The name was chosen as a decoy. It’s intent was corporate ownership of our government and that is what this decision has allowed.

In a 5-4 split decision, the Supreme Court invalidated a provision in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act that prohibited unions and corporations from giving money to election campaigns. Justice Kennedy, speaking for the majority, said that the corporations and unions had their First Amendment right of free speech violated. The government argued that the ban, for over 100 years, had helped to fight corruption but Kennedy said that “…the anticorruption interest is not sufficient to displace the speech here in question.” Their faulty assumption was that corporate spending would be transparent and incorruptible – both terrible assumptions that have been proven completely wrong. 

The Justices that dissented called the decision “profoundly misguided…the ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the nation.” Justice Stevens also wrote that this ruling would greatly increase the influence and power corporations have in determining the winners in elections. Since his retirement, Stevens has advocated for a constitutional amendment to overrule the Court’s decision. The Citizens United ruling opened the flood gates for corporations, extremely wealthy individual donors, and special interest groups to buy politicians, political parties, and remove the people of the United States from the legislative process. 

Super PACs

Remember PACs can contribute directly to a candidate’s campaign but there are restrictions on how much they can raise, and contribute ($5,000 per year, per election) but a new beast was created in 2010. A federal appeals court, citing Citizens United, ruled in the case of Speechnow.org v. FEC, that as long as they don’t give directly to candidate’s campaigns, outside groups had no limit on the money they could raise or spend in influencing election results — promoting a candidate and/or smearing another.

These new Nazi U-Boats used against American democracy are called Super PACs. The icing on the corruption cake is that while Super PACs have to disclose where their money came from, the questionable non-profits that donated that money to the Super PACs do not (this is called dark money). This means that China and/or Wells Fargo can give billions to these shady non-profits to ensure their candidates get elected, and there’s no way to trace the money to them. Once elected, the politician will vote how they’re told to vote by their corporate masters. This is our system. Are you disgusted?

According to OpenSecrets.org, as of January 10, 2021, 2,276 groups organized as super PACs have reported total receipts of $3,164,953,623 and total independent expenditures of $2,141,181,831 in the 2019-2020 cycle. Almost 80% of all that money came from the top 100 donors. The average citizen donates somewhere in the $50 range thinking it’s helping their candidate. 

How do we undo this web of lies and money? 

It is highly unlikely that the Supreme Court will reverse their decision. Egos in black robes grow old with no consideration or reflection to the average citizens on their decisions. We have to take control and it won’t be an easy task. 

1) Publicly funded elections. This allows the average person (non-millionaire) to run against the millionaires because they are given the same amount to spend. 

2) Empower a new, legitimate, Federal Elections Commission with public oversight. Give teeth to the body that is supposed to oversee elections and allow the people to monitor what they are doing with full disclosure throughout. 

3) Strengthen disclosures. Every penny should be accounted for and transparent to the citizens as to where it came from.

4) Amend the Constitution to end corporate, union and dark money systems that have arisen since the Citizens United case.

Call to action

All of these steps will require our attention to who is running for office and active participation in asking their support for the above changes. If they promise to do these things in exchange for our vote, then vote for them. If they do not commit to these (why do you think that would be? Hmmmmm?) don’t vote for them. Stop pulling that party lever, whatever party you may support, in a system that is completely broken and corrupt.  

It’s time to take back our democracy – for all of us. 

This is the final article in a three-part series by Alan J. Yeck reflecting on the state of the American political system, its challenges and the far-reaching effects it can have.

Read Part 1 Here

Read Part 2 Here

We have the power to change American politics back to a system that serves the people, not the politicians. Contact your representatives and ask them to listen to these facts and national narratives.

A History of Liars: The American Politician (Volume One)

Alan J. Yeck

This is the second part of a three-part series.

Campaign Finance Corruption

Corruption in government, be it a monarchy (kings and queens), a dictatorship (North Korea) or a democracy, has always been, has always existed. Corruption in the United States government has always been, has always existed. The difference today is that information is more easily available in a much quicker time frame. Don’t confuse this with misinformation or disinformation, which is actively used by politicians and political parties to deflect from their own corruption. While there are scandals, which are corrupt, what we’re going to focus on is specific to campaign financing or who is paying for our elected officials to vote one way or the other. Hint – it’s not you or me.  

Background on campaign finance reform in the U.S.

Before we had our own country to corrupt, in 1757, George Washington ran for a seat in the House of Burgesses for the Virginia Colony – kind of like today’s equivalent of a state legislator. He threw a big party for potential voters with lots of alcohol and great food. Washington was elected to the seat and then almost immediately the House of Burgesses passed an act prohibiting candidates from giving any sort of “reward” like food, drink or cash in exchange for a vote.

Now let’s jump to the 1904 presidential election. Incumbent Republican President Theodore Roosevelt was running against Democratic nominee, Alton B. Parker. To make sure he won the election, he raised over $2 million in campaign contributions from corporations (that would be the equivalent of $59 million today – a record amount at that time). Teddy won but not without a scandal from his corporate fundraising. In response to the scandal Roosevelt called for legislation to ban corporate contributions to future candidates. Ha! Roosevelt signed into law the Tillman Act in 1907 which banned corporate donations but the Act had no teeth, no enforcement provisions were included so politicians just crawled on their bellies around it. 

A few years later in 1910 the House passed the Federal Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) that required candidates to disclose both campaign spending and the sources of all contributions. The Senate passed an amendment in 1911 requiring the same and also placed limitations on spending for all congressional candidates. Sounds great, right? ‘Sound’ as in an empty gong though.

After Henry Ford lost a senate race to Truman Newberry in 1918, Ford charged that Newberry violated the spending limit laws of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act by raising over $100,000 for his campaign. Newberry was convicted in 1921 but his conviction was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court (Newberry v. United States) who struck down spending limits. The Court ruled that the Federal Corrupt Practices Act was unconstitutional because the Constitution does not grant Congress the authority to regulate political parties or federal primary elections. This was the fertile soil of corruption that today’s mighty, corrupt political beanstalk grew from. 

Legislation continued through the mid-1900s trying to limit the political influence corporations could wield, as well as the growing unions and trade associations. In the 1940s, Congress passed the Smith-Connally and Taft-Hartley Acts banning labor unions from contributing directly to political campaigns. This is the true birth of our corrupted political system today – not the Act but the response to it.

Labor unions then created Political Action Committees or PACs and the effects have been complete destruction to our democracy. 1) because PACs were not unions, per se, PACs could contribute money to candidates and still be within campaign finance guidelines, and 2) PACs were not required to follow the political advertising and spending laws that the candidates had to follow. They could spend as much as they wanted to advertise and promote their candidates to their members and the public in general without ever giving a dime directly to the candidate’s campaign. 

In an attempt to truly reform campaign finance laws (or at least give the appearance of doing so), in 1971 Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA – not be confused with FECA-L matter which is another mainstay of Congress). This defined how much money candidates could spend on their campaigns. Again, toothless.  They created the Act but did not appoint a body to enforce it. Think of a law that establishes the speed limit at 65mph but law enforcement doesn’t have any authority to pull someone over doing 100mph. Another great job by our elected morons. Later, in 1974, after the Watergate scandal, they refined FECA to create today’s bi-partisan Federal Election Commission (FEC) which is supposed to enforce campaign finance laws but has become non-functioning in recent years.   

The following year, Sen. James Buckley (R-NY) sued the FEC (Buckley v. Valeo) arguing that limits on campaign spending violated free speech rights. In 1976 the Supreme Court agreed and the Act was amended which meant politicians had unlimited campaign spending. The Court also found that the provision restricting the amounts candidates could spend from their personal funds, unconstitutional. This has very much created a system where an honest citizen who wants to serve their community and country must raise tremendous amounts of money, or already be a millionaire. Currently over half of the members of Congress were millionaires. Do you think a millionaire or career politician, who is also a millionaire, represents you? 

This is the second article in a three-part series by Alan J. Yeck reflecting on the state of the American political system, its challenges and the far-reaching effects it can have.

We have the power to change American politics back to a system that serves the people, not the politicians. Contact your representatives and ask them to listen to these facts and national narratives.

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.

By Alan J. Yeck

Just when I thought the political fruit cake couldn’t get any nuttier, I woke to the news that Hillary Clinton, in a discussion with Nancy Pelosi, shared her own conspiracy theory that President Trump called Vladimir Putin on the day of the riot at the Capital. I find myself going back and forth between being entertained by the moron platform (well used by both parties) to really pissed off that this is even in the news. Maybe it’s true, maybe it’s not? That’s why we wait for facts before holding public hearings. I don’t like Trump but I don’t like Biden either. I don’t like any of them and this is just another example of ‘why.’ Their intense, personal hatred of Trump comes first and foremost, well before issues that are affecting and destroying the American people on a daily basis. Vengeance is mine, says the Lord…and Hillary and Nancy. Don’t you wish they were that consumed with the fraudulent, student loan industry? Don’t you wish they spent their energy on campaign finance reform, or healthcare, or a distribution plan for the COVID vaccine? Don’t you wish all of them had their heads out of their asses and actually worked for the welfare of the American people? I do.

The next WTF moment came with two commercials on the networks; one was about TV news personality, Katie Couric, being interviewed by the news, about Trump. The other promo was about the news, interviewing CBS News White House correspondent, Major Garrett, on Trump. This is what we do now – the news interviews the news and makes it news when it’s not news at all. Again, I’m not defending nor supporting any of the politicians including Trump, but is it a surprise, to anyone in the country, how the mainstream news networks loathe Trump? I’m not saying they don’t have good reason – I’m saying they are news networks and not gossip tabloids (or shouldn’t be gossip tabloids). If you also loathe Trump do you need more loathing ammo? If you support Trump, does this ease your fears as we transition to a new Biden administration? Maybe try reporting on how much money from Super PACs go to which politicians? How about where the thousands upon thousands of lobbyists spend their time, and money, in Washington? How about using the power of the press to bring real, lasting change to a country desperately needing it, by real reporting and not a vendetta agenda. Do you understand that as you also seek your pound of old, white, flabby, flesh that you only create more mistrust in what you report on?  The only difference between you and The National Enquirer is…nothing. Except I did see Elvis in an Asheville head shop so the Enquirer’s reporting on that was true. 

Please follow us at AltRaged and like our Facebook page (although they continue to censor our ads).

Supreme Court Endorsed Corruption – Citizens United v. FEC

From the “If No One is Around When Democracy Dies, Does it Make a Sound?” Part 4

Super PACs empower the wealthiest donors, and the expansion of dark money through shadowy nonprofits that don’t disclose their donors. On the other hand, we know those being elected are well aware of who is making their donations and what they expect in return. They don’t sell their souls – they sell ours.

“Citizens United.” Doesn’t that sound like a great group to be part of? Doesn’t it sound so American? Baseball, hotdogs, apple pie and Citizens United. Their logo, an eagle head with the red and white flag stripes behind it. Americans united together, working together to the benefit of the people. But it was the exact opposite – the name, intentionally chosen to sound all-American, to keep your defenses down, to let it slide by while it’s intent was nefarious and to the control and destruction of the very people who were fooled by it.

In 2010 there were two landmark decisions that paved the way for the corporate control of our political system; one by the federal appeals court in Washington, SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission, and the other, the U.S. Supreme Court ,Citizen’s United v. Federal Election Commission. Both ruled that the government cannot disallow corporations and unions from making “independent expenditures” for political uses. The Citizens United ruling also struck down FECA’s complete ban on corporate and union independent spending, originally passed as part of the Taft-Hartley law in 1947.

Their insane reasoning? Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that it would violate their First Amendment right of free speech to limit political spending from corporations. Their decision was based on a complete lack of any type of understanding of human nature, and specifically politicians and the dirty systems they work in. The majority of justices assumed (and you know what happens when we ass-u-me) that independent spending would be transparent and could not be corrupted. They said that by corporations and unions raising and using money for to support campaigns, that it “did not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.”

(Uh, are you shitting me?) This essentially means that Pfizer Pharmaceutical is no different than you for campaign financing (except of course they have $50 billion more cash flow than you). Wait, wait, it gets better – Super PACs have no limit on donations so they can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations and unions to advocate for, or against candidates of their choice. Their goal is to influence the outcome of state and federal elections (to put their person in office, the person that will do what they tell them to do, the person that will vote how they tell them to vote).  Wait a minute…isn’t that the people’s job? It used to be but we’re only for appearance now…like the Queen (have you been practicing your wave?).  The dissenting opinion written by Justice John Paul Stevens stated, “At bottom, the Court’s opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self-government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt.” You don’t have to have a law degree or be a judge to understand that truth, and apparently even when you have those things it doesn’t give you anymore wisdom than the thug on the street.  

This is part 4 of the “Democracy Dies” series, covering the corruption surrounding PACS, SuperPACs, and how candidates pay for votes.

To read part 1, go to https://altraged.com/2020/10/23/if-no-one-is-around-does-democracy-make-a-sound-when-it-dies-part-1/

For part 2, go to https://altraged.com/2020/10/28/if-no-one-is-around-when-democracy-dies-does-it-make-a-sound-part-2/

For part 3, go to https://altraged.com/2020/11/12/what-are-pacs-and-superpacs/

President-elect Biden’s Current Student Debt Solutions are Deeply Flawed and Inadequate;

Ideas proposed only ensure the corruption continues in the student loan industry.

The $1.7 trillion of student loan debt is an economic disaster for our nation but the solutions proposed by President-elect Biden and his senate supporters fall well short of lasting, legitimate solutions. In summary, the plans are to give X amount of money ($10,000+), to student borrowers who meet X qualifications (where they attended school, how much their families make, minority or displaced population, etc.), and all of this only applicable to undergraduate degrees.  

“Without addressing the multiple issues that caused the $1.7 trillion dollar student debt crisis, the solutions proposed by Biden, Senators Schumer and Warren, do little to help the American people,” said Alan Yeck, Founder and Executive Director of AltRaged. “The government, both Democrats and Republicans created this mess – not the students. Congress started this crisis fifty years ago through changes in the bankruptcy code and multiple changes in the Higher Education Act.” There are simple, but key steps that have to be put in place for a lasting fix.

The disgraceful costs of higher education must be reined in

There is no reason a bachelor’s degree at a state institution should cost $40-50,000. Like a black hole in space where gravity’s pull is so strong that even light cannot escape, fiscal mismanagement and lack of leadership in higher education have created a system that will devour every dollar, and then immediately look for more. The costs are not reflective of markets or student’s abilities to repay. The government solution of throwing money at the problem, without accountability by higher education only benefits the massive, corrupt student loan collection industry. 

Full bankruptcy rights must be restored to student loan borrowers

The Student Borrower Bankruptcy Relief Act (H.R. 2648), if passed, would remove the section of the bankruptcy code that currently prevents student loans from being treated the same as other non-criminal debt (as it used to be before Congress changed the code, which removed the safety valve for the cost of higher education). Schools charge phenomenal tuition and fees knowing the government will loan the money, and the loan “servicers” know the students and parents are then trapped. Wage garnishment, social security garnishment, tax return garnishment, and estate seizures for private loans; it is a lifelong, true debtors prison our elected officials continue to protect because of the payouts to their campaigns from Super PACs, both red and blue. 

Cancellation by the executive branch

There is an ongoing discussion that the executive branch has the authority to instruct the Secretary of Education to cancel student loans, without the approval of congress. But as is the case with all political rhetoric, the devil is in the details and there’s plenty of evil in this system. If he does, Biden would most likely also make those cancellations conditional to only certain groups, degrees, and dollar amounts – similar to their previous restrictions.  This again leaves millions of borrowers abandoned to the collection wolves. 

Student loan reform

Beyond fixing the cost of education, beyond restoring bankruptcy, beyond cancelling all student debt, the entire student loan system needs to be reformed and the outsourcing to the loan servicers eliminated. There are millions of Americans who owe more than $100,000 because of fraudulent interest, penalties and lies. It is impossible to ever pay these off and without bankruptcy relief, the loan “servicers” will garnish until death. The lives of millions of Americans in similar situations are being destroyed because Washington appears to only address selective issues with this crisis.   There is zero accountability and it affects the future of our country for all citizens.

Yeck continued, “It’s the biggest scam the U.S. Government ever pulled on the American people. Governmental loan sharking enforced with judicial muscle. The mob wishes they ever had it so good.” 

#altraged #studentloandebt #studentloancrisis

What are PACs and SuperPACs?

If No One is around when democracy dies, does it make a sound? Part 3

By Alan J. Yeck, Founder

Coming out of the our recent election just days ago, the term PACs and SuperPACs need to be defined now as much as ever. What do these acronyms mean? And how are these groups contributing to the fall of American democracy?

Political action committees (PACs)

Traditional nonconnected political action committees –

are prohibited from accepting money from corporations, unions, and associations. These are tax-exempt organizations that raise money in support of candidates and/or specific legislation they want to see pass/defeated. Federal campaigns are regulated by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and State and local PACs are regulated by the State and local election boards. Nonconnected PACs are required to file quarterly reports with the FEC exactly who contributed the money and how the PAC spent the money. Individuals can donate up to $2,800 per election cycle (primary and general election) for a maximum of $5,600 a year.

• A nonconnected committee does not have a “connected organization”—that is, no corporation or labor organization establishes, administers or raises money for a nonconnected committee.

• All forms of support including money and other things of value received by a nonconnected committee from a sponsoring organization are considered contributions, which are subject to annual limits, prohibitions and disclosure requirements under the Federal Election Campaign Act.

• A nonconnected committee may solicit contributions from anyone in the general public who may lawfully make a contribution in connection with a federal election.

Today the FEC has registered from January to the end of June, 2019, 6,785 federal PACs reporting total receipts of $958.2 million and disbursements of $818.7 million. I want to stress here that PACs themselves are not inherently bad or corrupt. PACs can be a group of social workers trying to improve situations for families or environmentalist concerned with ocean pollution. Nonetheless, there is plenty of room here for layers and manipulation in the political garden of evil. I am confident we can develop a better, completely transparent system of funding political campaigns that honestly informs the voters who exactly is writing the checks, why they’re supporting/defeating, and who they are connected to beyond current reporting requirements. NOTE – The Federal Election Commission who overseas campaign contributions is basically a non-functioning mess right now and it itself needs reform and rehabilitation.

Super PACs – Separate segregated funds (SSFs)

Federal election law refers to a corporate- or labor organization-sponsored political committee as a “separate segregated fund” (SSF), though it is more commonly called a “political action committee” or PAC. As the name implies, money contributed to an SSF is held in a separate bank account from the general corporate or union treasury. A corporation or union that sponsors an SSF is called the connected organization. While corporations and labor organizations are generally prohibited from making contributions in connection with federal elections, the Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act) and Commission regulations permit them to set up political committees, which may raise funds permissible under the Act in order to make contributions to and expenditures on behalf of federal candidates and other committees.

• An SSF always has a sponsoring corporation or labor organization.

• An SSF may generally receive unlimited administrative support from its connected organization, and such support is usually not subject to federal disclosure requirements. The connected organization may use its general treasury funds to pay the establishment, administration, and fundraising costs for the SSF.

• An SSF may solicit only a limited class of individuals who have specific relationships with the connected organization (i.e., stockholders or members and certain employees of the connected organization and their families).

• The connected organization may also exercise control over its SSF. Corporations and unions often adopt bylaws to govern their SSFs, though bylaws are not required under the law and do not have to be filed with the FEC except when requested.

This is part 2 of the “Democracy Dies” series, covering the corruption surrounding PACS, SuperPACs, and how candidates pay for votes.

To read part 1, go to https://altraged.com/2020/10/23/if-no-one-is-around-does-democracy-make-a-sound-when-it-dies-part-1/

For part 2, go to https://altraged.com/2020/10/28/if-no-one-is-around-when-democracy-dies-does-it-make-a-sound-part-2/

If No One is Around When Democracy Dies, Does it Make a Sound? Part 2

The fox passes acts to watch the hen house…

The Tillman Act of 1907 was the first legislation in the United States prohibiting contributions from corporations  and unions to national political campaigns. More regulations were added in 1910, with subsequent amendments in 1925, with the Federal Corrupt Practices Act. This was followed in 1943 with the Smith-Connally Act and again in 1947 with the Taft-Hartley Act. All were focused on regulating union and corporate spending in federal campaigns and public disclosure of donors. While all these Acts were on the books, there was never a government agency tasked with enforcement (similar to having a speed limit sign on a desert highway with no cops).  

In 1971, Congress consolidated its earlier reform efforts in the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), instituting more stringent disclosure requirements for federal candidates, political parties and Political action committees (PACs). This was later amended in 1974 to set limits on contributions by PACs, individuals, political parties, and also established the Federal Election Commission (FEC) – the first independent agency that would be tasked to enforce campaign finance Acts.

In 2002, Congress made major revisions to the FECA in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, more commonly referred to as “McCain-Feingold.” However, major portions of McCain-Feingold were later struck down by the Supreme Court on constitutional grounds.  In June 2008, the “millionaire’s amendment,” a section of the act that attempted to provide a fairness through increasing campaign contributions for candidates who were being substantially outspent by opponents using their own personal wealth, was overturned by the Supreme Court in Davis v. Federal Election Commission. Senator McCain consistently voiced concern over campaign practices and their funding.

“Questions of honor are raised as much by appearances as by reality in politics, and because they incite public distrust, they need to be addressed no less directly than we would address evidence of expressly illegal corruption…By the time I became a leading advocate of campaign finance reform, I had come to appreciate that the public’s suspicions were not always mistaken. Money does buy access in Washington, and access increases influence that often results in benefiting the few at the expense of the many.” Senator John McCain, 2002.

B-I-N-G-O! And 18 years later it’s only gotten worse.

This is part 2 of the “Democracy Dies” series, covering the corruption surrounding PACS, SuperPACs, and how candidates pay for votes. To read part 1, go to https://altraged.com/2020/10/23/if-no-one-is-around-does-democracy-make-a-sound-when-it-dies-part-1/