TheStephensRecord.com

Can Supreme Court Decision bring Greater Transparency?

There is a lot of chatter today around the Supreme Court decision on corporate donations for elections.  Most of what I've heard today focused on how the ruling will negatively impact democracy, finding another way for corporations to dig their way into politician's pockets. Searching for the positive light in any of this, it will be interesting to see if the ruling brings about greater transparency in the way corporations influence elections.

 There's no question that big business has played a part in determining the outcomes for politicians they back.  It's no new saying that "candidate X is in the pockets of big business."  Typically, money comes through more covert lines of funding. However, now, their giving will be more in the spotlight.

This might not be such a bad thing, thanks to the growing rise of watchdog advocates on the internet and cable news. news. 

Advocacy journalism, either grassroots or on the cable networks, worked to expose the invisible hand of big business at play in American democracy. Let's hope they continue to rise to this challenge, now that the paper trail has been greatly diminished.

What value do values have?

Sojourner's founder Rev. Jim Wallis appeared on John Stewart's The Daily Show Wednesday night, promoting his new book on values. Wallace gave an insightful look on what essentially is the key component missing from progressive rhetoric these days. Wallace is the perfect spokesperson, in this regard, immersed for decades in probably one of the greatest value based narratives in human history, the Hebrew and Christian Testaments. In light of Tuesday's defeat, it could do the Democratic party some good to start soul searching.

I'm not suggesting that faith take a front row seat in politics. However, there's a lot to be learned from groups that deal with the conversion of people's ideologies on a daily basis. It could offer much for the craft of healthy debate and rhetorical discourse. Wallis appears around half way into the program.

Last evening's defeat for the Democrats in Massachusetts is a perfect example of how straying from the core narrative can leave you lost in the dark. Perhaps the party has been too blinded by the bright lights of success after this year, unable to stand back and focus on the fundamental steps that led them astray. So, what are those fundamentals:

1. Focus on the short-term without long-term set clearly in the horizon is a sure sign of SB (social blindness).
2. The inability to develop a solid coalition willing to make sacrifices for the common good remains a major obstacle, with the party still divided into sub cultures that have lost their cenergy.

3. there still lacks no clear consensus of voice within the party, beyond that of the White House.

For the latter, perhaps it's a sign of the ongoing battle between young and old progressives. Boston is truly a city with two tales. On one end, there is the established bedrock of democrats who have led not just the state but the nation for the past five decades. While on the other end there is the mass onslaught of young progressives who flood the city's streets at the end of each summer.

Boston is a strong witness to just what the Democratic party needs to accomplish if it wishes to win in 2010. Young progressives can be engaged by a presidential race, but they have not the experience to sustain momentum into midterm elections, at least this one will be the first real test for Generation M. It's the bedrock who comes out in force during the midterms and off-election, as witnessed last night, a very different arrangement than the presidential election which took its energy from independents and young progressives.