LIVING SECOND CLASS
IN A
FIRST AMENDMENT LAND

"I find nothing at all wrong with political activity financed by people, whether it's small contributions or large. To me that's them exercising their First Amendment right."  
- Wayne Hamilton, executive director of the Texas Republican Party

by JUDITH HANEY

USNewsLink/December 22, 2002

"Just 48 wealthy Texas families paid more than half the cost of the key campaigns that convinced 2.6 million voters to solidify the Republican hold on Texas state government in last month's elections," a Houston Chronicle study of campaign records found recently.

These official records indicated that these wealthy few donated $34 million of the $64 million used to finance top Republican state of Texas campaigns.

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, (BCRA), Public Law No. 107-155, sponsored in the Senate was passed in order to ban soft money and thereby reduce the undue influence of special interest groups and wealthy donors in political campaigns.

This law was passed none too soon because soft money has spiraled out of control in recent election cycles, with more than $500 million collected by the two major parties during the recent 2002 mid term elections.

As a result of soft money contributions, the nation's political, judicial, and social systems have fallen under the control of wealthy citizens and corporations, with the interests of the average American citizen no longer represented.

In spite of these facts, voter turnout for the last national election was low among the nation's second class, i.e., minorities, women and older citizens, who are hardest hit by the nation's failure to address issues of poverty, jobs, and health care.

But in the broader sense, the question remains: Will the nation's critical social and economic issues that severely affect the quality of life for the nation's second class be addressed, and remedies sought, if and when the soft money ban is upheld at the federal district court level?

What does soft money, political parties, and soft money bans have to do with the nation's social problems? According to the U.S. government publication, An Outline of the U.S. Economy, the answer is nothing. These are different issues and the failure of one system should not affect the outcome and efficacy of another.

The nation's economic health is interdependent upon the U.S. gross national product, balance of trade, and other international factors - no matter who occupies the White House or which party controls Congress. In the shadow of that multi-tentacled economic force, it is highly doubtful that the needs of the nation's poorest, weakest, sickest, under educated, and neediest, will ever be met in such a climate of unbridled capitalism which the world has come to depend upon and exploit.

Poverty in and among the nation's second class is a fact of life. And that is the reality of living second class in a first amendment land.

But consider this: If the nation's wealthiest evolved a "moral will" and implemented that "will" by giving as much back to the country's poor as they spent on just one national election in soft money contributions, how much better off would the country be?

The answer is: We will "probably" never know, and that is the pain of living second class in a first amendment land.

In view of these painful realities, it becomes all the more important for the nation's political leadership to lend it's unqualified bi-partisan support for federally funded programs that will benefit the second class in the areas of jobs, education, housing, health care, and credit availability.

The consequence of the nation's failure to heed the call from the second class to improve the quality of their lives is in evidence by the cost society bears to house inmates, to care for abandoned children and senior citizens, and the rising population among the nation's homeless.

Americans of every social station has a duty to themselves, to their families and the generations that will follow them, and to their country to reach back and help others along their journeys.

And, just as wealthy citizens and corporations have a first amendment right to spend their money in ways they see fit, they also have a moral duty to spread their wealth in ways that benefit their fellow human beings trapped in the second class.

The $500 million dollars that was spent on last month's election across the country could also have been spent improving the lives of the second class. If soft money bans are upheld, I wonder, where will the wealthy next spend their $500 million in loose change?

The Soft Money Laundromat is a searchable database of special interest soft money contributions to the Democratic and Republican national party committees. Learn about soft money. Who gives it, who gets it and what it all means for our democracy.

Wealthy few helped GOP's state sweep

Common Cause Announces Legal Challenge to Political Parties Trying to Violate New Soft Money Ban

BUYING INFLUENCE SELLING DEATH: How Big Tobacco's Campaign Contributions Harm Public Health.

Senate Joint Fundraisers Rake in $17.8 Million in Soft Money During 1999-2000.

NATIONAL PARTIES RAISE RECORD $457 MILLION IN SOFT MONEY THROUGH NOVEMBER 27,2000 - NEARLY DOUBLE PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CYCLES.

ANALYSIS OF CONGRESSIONAL RACES: 98% of House Incumbents Win Reelection in 2000; 23 of 28 Senate Incumbents Reelected; Incumbents Enjoy Huge Fundraising Advantage.

THE MICROSOFT PLAYBOOK:Tech Giant Reboots Strategy and Upgrades Political Contributions

YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR: Computer, Telecommunications and Labor Unions Giving Grows Substantially During First 18 Months of 2000 Election Cycle

THE $6 MILLION SOLUTION: Consumer Creditor Interests Continue Their End of Session Push Towards Bankruptcy Legislation

National Parties Raise Record $256 Million In Soft Money During First Eighteen Months Of 1999-2000 Election Cycle

UNDER THE RADAR: The Attack of the "Stealth PACs" on Our Nation's Elections

Senator McCain said he wished everybody could read this report in its entirety

"Follow the Dollar Reports..." 100% Special-Interest Financing: Special Interests Contribute Record Amounts of Soft Money During 1999

Testimony of Common Cause President Scott Harshbarger Before the Senate Rules Committee