Washington Fails to Stop Jon Corzine or the NDAA
Nick Carraway
Some rights reserved by notladjFor those in the 75% of Americans who think the country is headed in the wrong direction, a look at this week's big news stories isn't helping bolster belief in the American democratic system. As the financial crisis of 2008 proved, the biggest threat to the US security and our traditionally held democratic values is the country's abysmal failure at showing responsibility both in managing the government's ballooning debt and regulating the abuses of the finance industry. In collusion with the US Treasury and the private Federal Reserve, the executives of major Wall Street banks seem ever more brazen in their efforts to amass staggering personal fortunes even if it means breaking laws. By placing their operatives in governmental positions, these "too big to fail" financial criminals have all but insured their immunity from the justice system even after receiving record amounts of tax payer bail outs.
Most recently, Jon Corzine, former head of MF Global, former head of Goldman Sachs and former governor of New Jersey, epitomizes the corruption taking place between government and the financial sector. In defiance of a long standing rule even amongst investment banks, MF Global misused funds from its segregated customer accounts to make risky bets on the likelihood of a crash in the European markets. Despite being called to testify in multiple Congressional hearings, Corzine maintains that even as CEO of the now bankrupt MF Global, he has no idea what happened to an estimated $1.2 billion in customer funds that just simply disappeared. At least one insider suggested otherwise, that Corzine knowingly broke the law and dipped into the accounts to leverage his impulsive investments in the volatile European sovereign debt markets. Of course, no warrants have been issued for Corzine, but one can hope he will at least see some justice in the form of lawsuits for tens of millions of dollars that his ruined customers will no doubt file against him.
To anyone following the government's handling of the financial crisis, it is not surprising that neither Corzine nor any other heads of big banks have ever been charged for any financial crimes. The White House has been loaded with Wall Street sympathizers like Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner who doled out banker bailouts in his former capacity as head of the New York branch of the Federal Reserve, and both chiefs of staff under Obama. Under Rahm Emanuel, a former investment banker and Clinton appointee to the board of the bubble-causing Freddie Mac, the White House shifted its policy focus away from meaningful financial reform towards health care during the first half of Obama's presidency. After Emanuel's departure to become mayor of Chicago, he was soon replaced by William Daley, another banker. In addition to being the brother of the previous mayor of Chicago whom Emanuel replaced, Bill Daley also served on the board of Fannie Mae in the 1990s and most recently held a chairman position for JPMorgan Chase.
As a president who has publicly railed against Wall Street excess and sympathized with the Occupy Wall Street movement, it seems odd that Obama's political actions and choice in staff appointments don't match his lofty rhetoric; that is until you consider that his largest campaign donations in 2008 came from the financial sector. Currently Obama is receiving more dollars from big business executives than any of the Republican presidential candidates, already raising around $5.6 million through the end of September. In second place is Mitt Romney, the former head and founder of hedge fund Bain Capital. Apparently, Wall Street is making bets on both sides to ensure that whoever takes control of the White House in 2012 won't stand in the way of the obscene profits they have generated from fraudulent derivatives trading and speculation in the European sovereign debt crisis.
Apart from his favorable treatment of a financial sector that brought the American economy to its knees, President Obama continues to be surprisingly aggressive in rolling back personal liberties that liberals have long accused the political right of violating. Yesterday, the White House backed off its veto threat of the National Defense Authorization Act. Primarily a funding bill, the NDAA has caused controversy due to its inclusion of an unprecedented clause that authorizes military arrests on American soil and indefinite detentions of American citizens who are merely suspected of terrorism. Despite objections from Human Rights Watch, FBI Director Robert Mueller, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, National Intelligence Director James Clapper, and the ACLU, Obama's advisors have recommended that he allow the NDAA to become law.
Even more shocking, the reason for the withdrawal of Obama's veto threat had more to do with his desire for expansion of executive power rather than any wish to safeguard the individual liberties of Americans. Instead of removing the controversial clause that effectively ends the Posse Comitatus Act, Congress appeased the president by inserting language that would give him and all future presidents a waiver of the military custody provision and increased discretion in the use of military force against American citizens suspected of terrorism. While the current administration has pledged never to use this power, this promise comes from a man who once also pledged to close down Guatanamo Bay. Instead, President Obama has now opened the doors of Gitmo for the potential indefinite detainment of American citizens.
As the news stories above suggest, a host of forces are lining up against democracy during a year in which Time Magazine named the "protestor" its Man of the Year. No matter how vocal the opposition from activists and citizen journalists, the financial sector and political establishment continue to be a source of concern for believers in liberty and justice for all. As the one remaining uncorrupted source of democratic power, the voting populace has to be aware of these and other issues that will surely shape the struggle to preserve democratic freedoms in the coming election year.
Reader Comments (1)