Has lack of participation driven us to the brink?

We live in a society based on participation. Democracy, the form of government our founders chose, requires citizens’ participation for the common good. Yet at every level today, citizens choose to drop out. They may complain, but they refuse to participate.

I see it locally. Churches, civic groups and political parties struggle to find people willing to attend meetings and take part. I see it nationally with the decline in voting and in unions.

Folks, this is by design.

Our lack of participation has allowed a small group of ultra wealthy and connected individuals to work us to the bone for less and less. The more productive we become, the less they pay and the more hours they demand. Meanwhile, our civic institutions are weakened as these same individuals and their constituent organizations tilt the tax code to ensure they pay less and less to support our common infrastructure.

So instead of standing up, yelling and pushing back, we’ve all retreated to our living rooms to watch American Idol or Survivor. We’ve ceased to read about the policies they’ve pushed through not only Congress, but our statehouses. Instead, we keep track of politicians’ selfies and follow celebrity news.

These power brokers work secretively, but via the efforts of a tiny band of persistent scholars and investigative journalists, we are learning about their efforts.

First, the Center for Media and Democracy was blessed with a document dump about the efforts of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). This organization was formed in 1973 by corporate conservative activist Paul Weyrich; they’ve had 40 years to build a network and institute their initiatives.

The State Policy Network is a related organization, also now under the microscope thanks to the Center for Media and Democracy’s stinktanks.org web site. This group works to publish the phony research of fake think tanks; of course, said research supports corporate initiatives and is camouflaged to fool gullible pundits and media outlets.

And speaking of the media, most corporate media in the U.S. (network and cable radio and TV stations and large metropolitan papers) are owned by a handful of corporations. It is the owners who shape the perspective and tone of news reports, and they make sure it protects their interests. News consumers must remember that – always.

Organizations like Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) monitor news reports continuously to highlight the most egregious instances of bias and untruth. And if you enjoy satire, John Stewart’s Daily Show, Stephen Colbert’s Colbert Report, and The Onion also catch many of the media’s worst cases of misinformation.

But again, citizens must participate in the process. It’s a simple thing. Pick a group and attend a meeting. Be willing to help with an event. Talk to someone new, and listen to them, too. Engage.

This is how the 99% will take back their country – by barreling through the divisions these secretive special interests have erected between us. When we stop accepting just what they give us and demand better, everything will change. When we stand up for the interests of people instead of shilling for corporate interests by parroting anti-union, anti-worker, anti-tax rhetoric, our representatives will start changing their votes. When we inform ourselves based on facts instead of reacting in anger at swirling internet rumors, they’ll begin to lose their power.

Americans have done this before; we can do it again -- if we are willing to participate.

Who’s manufacturing your news?

After weeks of battling media misinformation about the Affordable Care Act, I was hungry to write about something different this week. And thankfully, a different item popped up as my deadline loomed.

Two headlines screamed out to me on Thursday morning: “DOUBLE WOW!! www.StinkTanks.org PERFECTLY Exposes Koch Cabal $$ used in each US state” and “Corporate America’s New Scam: Industry P.R. Firm poses as Think Tank!” In other words, corporate interests use think tanks to lobby our representatives, and said think tanks make stuff up.

The first article, a Daily Kos post by War on Error, highlighted the latest project by the Center for Media and Democracy to uncover corporate manipulation of our government via media and think tanks. This new web site, stinktanks.org, allows citizens to track the influence of the State Policy Network, a Koch Brothers organization, currently targeting statehouses to advance corporate interests.

As War on Error writes, “While SPN members call themselves ‘think tanks,’ they rarely act as such. SPN groups often engage in extensive lobbying activities, even though nonprofits are limited in the amount of lobbying activity they may participate in by the IRS. SPN ‘think tanks’ release ‘research’ and policy reports, and there are numerous instances of SPN think tanks being accused of skewing facts and using faulty research to reach their policy goals. Many SPN think tanks also collaborate with the right-wing Franklin Center to launch agenda-driven ‘news’ outlets, hawking right-wing talking points from behind a mask of journalism.”

The second article outlined events surrounding the release of a study finding that low wages paid to fast food restaurant workers cost American taxpayers $7 billion in social supports annually. The study authors argued that raising these workers’ wages would unburden taxpayers of subsidizing super-sized corporate restaurant profits.

Shortly thereafter, media began reporting conflicting research results from an entity called the Employment Policies Institute. As article author Lisa Graves noted, “In fact, the Employment Policies Institute operates from the same office suite as Berman and Co., a public relations firm owned by Richard Berman. This is not an opinion; it’s a fact anyone can verify by viewing EPI and Berman and Co.’s websites. In such a depressed media environment — where there are four public relations flacks for every reporter, compared to a 1-to-1 ratio in the 1960s – it is not surprising that a P.R. company could successfully rebrand itself as a think tank and capitalize on an acronym held by an actual think tank, the Economic Policy Institute, with 20 staff and 36 respected research associates.”

This is why I always ask who is paying for your news. Who owns your favorite cable or network TV or radio station? Who owns your daily newspaper and magazines? Who owns and operates the web sites you visit? Are they for profit? Are they funded by advertising or donations?

And if owners and key decision makers are not transparent about these things, instead operating in secret, they are probably trying to manipulate you to act for their benefit, not yours.

Which, darn it all, gets me back to Obamacare. Are we going to accept the sketchy reports from media and politicians rooting for its failure, or are we going to fight for the help we need?

Can we focus government on the common good?

In Book Two of The Lord of the Rings, Theoden King of Rohan wastes away on his throne as evil threatens to destroy his kingdom. At his right hand, a bent and scrawny man referred to as Wormtongue whispers directions in his ear. Bewitched, Theoden and his country flounder and begin to fail.

In the U.S. and Iowa, we have our own corporate version of Wormtongue whispering in our state politicians’ ears. It’s called the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

As I learned when I was a school board director, even in the statehouse, schools were battling larger organizational interests – some corporate and some ideological. I also learned these groups often twisted the information they provided legislators, stretching or altering reality (if not outright lying) to serve their own interests.

It was later I heard about ALEC. According to the Center for Media and Democracy’s ALEC Exposed web site (www.alecexposed.org), ALEC is a consortium of wealthy corporate directors and legislators who meet to craft legislation in secret. Most of this legislation is written by corporate attorneys to benefit these same corporations. Then it is introduced to member legislators via conferences at luxury resorts. Records show 98% of ALEC’s funding comes from corporations, corporate foundations and corporate trade groups. And while organized as a non-partisan, non-profit entity, it currently lists only one Democrat out of 104 legislators in leadership positions.

Founded in 1973 by Conservative political strategist Paul Weyrich, ALEC has introduced hundreds of corporate-written bills in statehouses across the nation. A recent episode of Moyers and Company noted Weyrich’s plan to focus on building an entrenched network of corporate, conservative state legislators.

And the plan has worked. Moyers’ program highlighted a couple of ALEC model bills that have been passed in several states. One is the Virtual Schools Act, written by lobbyists for K12 Inc. and Connections Academy, the two leading national corporations developing online schools. Not coincidentally, these two companies operate Iowa’s two pilot online academies in conjunction with local school districts.

I say not coincidentally because the ALEC Exposed web site lists our governor as “involved in its formative years.” It also lists a number of current and former legislators as members of the organization. Additionally, Progress Iowa released an updated list of Iowa politicians earlier this year.

As two state legislators from Wisconsin and Arizona noted on Moyers’ program, while corporations have every right to advocate for their interests, they should not do it in secret under a tax status that specifically prohibits lobbying. Both legislators have been working to shed sunlight on ALEC’s work in their states. Meanwhile, ALEC not only claims it does not engage in lobbying, the group declares outright that it is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

So who represents our interests? Do Iowans want their laws written in secret by corporate lobbyists from who knows where? Because ALEC will continue to work behind the scenes, whispering in our representatives’ ears unless we raise our voices and votes to focus government on the common good -- instead of the corporate good.