“HOW MUCH DO THEY TAKE OUTTA YOUR CHECK?” Gabby said as she stormed into my office.
“Hi Gab,” I said as I turned away from my computer to see her studying the piece of paper in her hand.
“How much?” She asked without looking up.
“A SHAHIT LOAD!” I said, laughing at how upset she was about finally recognizing her role as a working taxpaying host.
“It’s not funny. This isn’t fair,” she said.
“It’s the redistribution of wealth… America’s charter,” I added.
“WHOSE WEALTH! I’M A COLLEGE KID WORKING TWO JOBS AT THE MALL, NOT SOME OLD BUSINESS OWNER GUY!”
“Don’t call me old!” I said looking over my glasses…like an old business owner guy.
WHERE’S IT ALL GOING? WHY DON’T I HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT IT?”
“You do. Vote!” I said.
“FOR WHO?”
“WHOM.”
“I can’t even talk to you sometimes,” she said angrily, storming out of my office. “I’m going to work out.”
It’s funny how kids with the same gene pool can be so different. Gabby’s a type A personality. Rigid. Intense. Vulcan-like, yet funny…and a little combative. Unlike her brother Joe, her “gray area” is a pencil thin line between black and white. I understand her personality as she IS the proverbial nut that fell from my family tree.
I appreciate her frustration from taxation with no apparent representation. I had the same questions when I first realized I was a voiceless stationary target, supposedly fraught with success-guilt from cashing my government-calculated paycheck. I have often thought there should be full disclosure on W4 forms, detailing how tax dollars are redistributed. Maybe a pie chart in appropriate colors; green for environmental dollars, blue for the military, yellow for infrastructure, and appropriate shades of gray for everything else that denotes an oppressive sweaty taxing body pressed uncomfortably behind us with both hands fumbling in our front pockets.
But that could lead to “pushback” akin to the Boston Tea Party. Could even lead to a run on road tar and chicken feathers… Nah, the donkeys and elephants are safe. We don’t do that anymore. We’ve been conditioned to accept confiscatory tax policy under threat of fines and imprisonment; like the policies from fiefdoms of Medieval England that carried over to early America. HEY! WAIT A MINUTE! Isn’t that why the first Revolution started? Nah, revisionists are teaching it started with a snowball fight or something. Never mind.
I don’t mind paying fair taxes. As a US citizen it’s my obligation to pay for things that make America the greatest nation in the world. But shouldn’t we have something to say about how the money is spent (or wasted)? I mean, we do, kind of. Being a “representative democracy” we vote for supposed “statesmen” to be our voice in Washington to legislate on the platform on which they ran and got elected. But in reality, they’re the cheating lover that brings you coffee and a cookie and tells you how great you are for paying the cable bill while they’re off running in the shadows with your credit card with a more exciting (and lucrative) sweetheart…”special interest.”
How is it that my voice, my vote, takes a backseat to lobbies and special interest? I voted for these people (and won) to carry my message to Washington. It seems lobbies nullify my tax-paying vote, reinforcing the hopeless reality that it doesn’t matter who gets elected.
I’m a rational gun ownership advocate but shouldn’t need the gun lobby to speak for me. Sheer numbers of voters that elected like-minded politicians should be OUR voice, our “lobby.” That’s the idea behind representation. And should AARP and the already outspoken and over-represented transgender alliance have a louder voice than the majority?
But people – smart people… friends and family – will say, “Big deal. It doesn’t matter because lobbies just relay their ideas to representatives because their numbers are too small to be heard.”
NO KIDDING! That’s what Representative Democracy is about! The will of the voting majority to be heard through their elected officials, not the squeaky minority that bats their eyelashes and shows a little leg…or more accurately, a fist full of dollars. When the other side wins, their majority voices will be heard. Any other influence simply negates the intention of representation.
According to Reuters there are 12,553 lobbyists registered in Washington, twisting the ears of our elected representatives. (The annual salary for a lobbyist is $108,727. A good gig.) But it’s telling that the word “bribery” is in just about every header if you Google “lobbyist” or “special interest.”
I want to believe that the political sea change of the last election has had a profound effect on politics, but in reality the political toadies are very comfortable in the murky slime of their polluted swamp. From the politician’s perspective, there’s no reason to change somethin’ that ain’t broke! (And why would they interfere with their annuity!)
So Gabby, to answer your question (the best that I can)…. I remain hopeful that we have a say in government through the intention of “one man one vote.” But it’s going to take a while (and constant vigilance) to undo generations of swamp politics. Elected officials should be held to a moral standard; one that acknowledges that voters are THE voice of America and the idea of political gratuity by lobbies and special interest groups are simply contrary to the original design…if not illegal. Who knows, in the end it may just come down to an old fashioned snowball fight
Good piece. Lobbyists should be outlawed!
Lobbyists are a necessity. We live in a time of specialization. Our elected representatives make decisions covering hundreds of subjects. At best, they might be experts in one or two of them, if any at all. Lobbyists provide the information they need to make informed decisions. What we all need to hope is that our representatives are smart enough and experienced enough to weed out the facts from the bias – and, as Vince says, with a good enough moral compass. Money talks, but it doesn’t have to always win.
Unfortunately the famous quote applies here, “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. I guess I can understand Alan’s point to some degree, but why do politicians have a need for a large staff? Isn’t it encumbent upon the politician to hire a knowledgeable group to keep them informed and up to date on issues? My problem is that lobbyist rarely if ever have the best interest of the nation in mind and politicians seem too eager to line their own pockets at the expense of the people while doing the bidding of those who are lining their pockets. Whereas a politician may start out with morals and ideals, judging by the rampant corruption that continuously unfolds before our eyes on a regular basis, the temptations seem to be too overwhelming to abstain from. This is all the more reason for term limits.