The Washington Arms Race

I have been trying--and failing--for several weeks to draft some thoughts on the Healthcare debate ongoing in Congress that didn't sink quickly into the insane and often offensive arguments made for and against it by those who loathe/support it for reasons that range from the purely partisan to the idealogical. It is frighteningly easy to get utterly lost in the back and forth of this debate. One side makes a claim, only tangentally based in fact. The other side reacts (more often overreacts) and we're off the races with volley after volley of vitriol that is poorly aimed and completely irrelevant to the core issue. This is the nature of our political discourse. It is unpleasant and more importantly, utterly counter-productive. There are many guilty parties, and the second you attempt to single them out, you've essentially fallen into their trap. Fox News correspondents and personalities love nothing more than to be singled out as the partisan hacks the majority of them are. The old axiom, there's no such thing as bad press, does not seem to have gone away in the internet age. The same is true of liberal personalities on the other networks, who make their living by enraging the conservative members of society while egging on those who already agree with them. But this is actually okay. Sure, it would be nice if the distance between the two extremes were not so great or the rhetoric were more based in logic and fact, but there is room in this country--fortunately or unfortunately--for both Glenn Beck and Michael Moore. Each can have their piece of the celebripolitician  pie.

What is not good for the country, however, is the zero-sum game of professional political lobbying. In much of politics, despite the best art of compromise, there is a loser and a winner for each piece of legislation brought to scrutiny by the legislative branch. In order to win a legislative fight for you interest, you engage in lobbying. Lobbyists and their practices are very expensive. Advertisers must be hired and pollsters brought on. Expensive advertising time and space is bought. Supposed "think-tanks" are established and "studies" are commissioned. Fleets of lawyers are chartered to protect the lobbyists from what few laws have been enacted to curb the spread of money and influence that they peddle. As a result, if you are an industry that has successfully lobbied congress, you have spent a greal deal of money to either better or ensure your position, often both. In order to maintain that position or enhance it, one is forced to continue to lobby as both the legislators and public opinion change over time. If you are an industry or movement that has successfully lobbied Washington for many many years, like, say, the insurance, health, and finance industries have, you have spent enormous amounts of money on the cause, based on the idea that if you were to spend any less, the house of cards you have built at great expense will come crashing down at the ambition of some stray, un-greased Senator.

The outcome of all this is that by allowing industries of great size and wealth to spend so much on making the government work to their liking, rather than ours, we have created a government that is up for auction to the highest bidder, where every bidder pays their highest bid, no matter who wins. This has spawned an arms race of propaganda, each side trying to outspend the other in hopes of winning and the side who has already spent the most has the most incentive to continue spending. In the case of the Insurance and Healthcare industry lobby, this adds up to a lot of incentive to win, and no price tag that is too big. They will happily buy a $1.00 for $1.50 if it means they get to continue to buy a $1.00.  And we're left spitting at each other like enraged llamas under the delusional belief that our bid of 1 dollar to purchase 1 dollar will let us walk away at even money.