Rich Man, Poor Man?
Rich-man, Poor-man, Beggar-man, Thief…Â
No, I’m not tripping on some ’70’s nostalgia, I’ve just finished reading this piece by Historical Pessimist about the dangers of Jack Davis’ Millionaire Complaint:
About a month ago, Kos wrote a front page entry entitled “Crazy Jack Davis and the woes of the millionaire.” In it he, described how 2-time loser Jack Davis, who ran against Tom Reynolds twice for the NY26th Congressional seat, was taking his lawsuit against the “Millionaire’s Amendment” section of BCRA (otherwise known as McCain-Feingold) all the way to the Supreme Court. Talk about bad optics: here was a supposed Democrat arguing that it should be easier for wealthy quacks like him to buy a seat in the people’s House.
Historical Pessimist’s diary :: ::
The Supreme Court heard the case a week ago and the tea leaf readers in the press suggest that the oral arguments indicate Davis is probably going to win. That’s bad enough, but now it appears the case contains a Trojan Horse which could end up invalidating the public financing systems of states like Maine and Arizona which have adopted them with great success.
The entire piece is definitely worth your time.Â
You don’t need to know anything about law any more to determine how the Supreme Court is going to vote. If it favors the wealthy, if it favors the rich corporations, if it favors Rethuglicans, if it favors employers, if it favors unlimited government trampling on people’s rights, then the Supreme Court will vote in favor. If it favors the poor, if it favors minorities, if it favors workers, if it favors anyone arrested on questionable circumstances or whose rights seem to be violated, the Supreme Court will vote against.
As far as this “Trojan Horse”, that is very scary. I believe this Supreme Court will find a way to tear down any progressive legislation.
I know way back when FDR was Prez, he threatened to change the Supreme Court from 9 judges to 15 judges and appoint liberal judges so he could get what he wanted. I would recommend this to Obama or Clinton, except I know I am wasting my time as they are far too centrist to follow through on this threat.
That is fascinating about FDR—I didn’t know that. Today that would be tantamount to civil war, so to speak.
You’re right about the Court and how Obama and Clinton would not be as bold as FDR. Of course, we’ve had nearly eight years of a bold president who listens to few people, so I doubt the country has much appetite for this type of brazen moves anyway, unless it was to end the war in Iraq.
The notion that spending your money is the same thing as free speech (Buckley v. Valeo) is one of the root problems here (again, brought to the Supremes by a New Yorker…). How is someone’s microphone and amp the same as my whisper?
Public financing is the best shot NY has at cleaning up Albany and its 98% reelection rate, and Jack Davis may be killing it for us and everyone else. How this guy gets away with calling himself a Democrat is a mystery to me.
The problem is it’s not like they make you take a test so you can do it, that is be a Democrat. Maybe there should be.
He is nothing more than a frustrated spoiler.
When almost 80% of upstaters –Democrats and Republicans — back public financing it shows just how out of touch “Crazy Jack Davis” really is with the people and the process.
[...] as Clean Money Clean Elections. Well - check out this conversation with the governor. Because the alternative is stuff like this. [...]