[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4kvUxQIJlA&rel=0]
James D’Angelo
The Empire Files 079
00:00
[Music]
00:19
[Music]
00:24
yet another shooting massacre of 17
00:27
students in parkland Florida has brought
00:29
the issue of corporate lobbying back
00:31
into public consciousness without rage
00:33
over the National Rifle Association’s
00:35
power and influence over politicians
00:37
according to open secrets in 2017 the
00:40
total amounts spent on lobbying Congress
00:42
was three billion dollars with eleven
00:45
thousand four hundred and forty four
00:46
registered lobbyists on the hill that’s
00:49
twenty six lobbyists for every elected
00:52
representative the top spender was Big
00:54
Pharma at nearly 300 million dollars
00:57
followed by industries such as oil and
00:59
gas telecommunications weapons and war
01:02
and big banks experts suggest that the
01:05
real amount spent on lobbying is really
01:07
three times higher than being disclosed
01:09
and the true amount of lobbyists closer
01:12
to a hundred thousand reforms that most
01:16
Americans believe help combat the system
01:18
of pay to play politics have instead
01:20
been weaponized against them
01:22
congressional researcher James D’Angelo
01:24
has a theory based on years of mining
01:26
through data but the legislative
01:28
reorganization Act of 1970 which opened
01:31
up politicians voting records has only
01:33
helped special interests and
01:34
corporations not the people I sat down
01:38
with James to talk about how corporate
01:40
lobbyists exploit transparency laws
01:42
which are thought to make the u.s.
01:44
system more democratic
01:46
so before we get into how transparency
01:49
has been weaponized let’s talk about how
01:51
things used to be before 1970 let’s talk
01:53
about how the president voted how
01:56
Congress functioned right so it’s
02:00
actually a very interesting time I mean
02:02
most people look back at the early 70s
02:04
as a time of turmoil is Vietnam there’s
02:06
lots of civil rights questions but
02:09
mathematically there’s some very
02:10
interesting things we are talking the
02:13
least partisan Congress in American
02:16
history we’re talking the lowest levels
02:19
of income inequality in American history
02:23
so the rich and the poor are closer than
02:25
at any time in US history and some of
02:28
the lowest in world history campaign
02:31
finances zero or next to zero certainly
02:34
if we’re talking Congress presidents
02:37
always had some campaign finance issues
02:39
going back to the Roosevelts etc but for
02:43
a member of Congress they’re not
02:44
receiving money to run for Congress in
02:47
1970 throughout history there have been
02:51
about 200 floor votes a year so if you
02:54
saw the Lincoln movie that’s actually
02:56
the entire movie is about a floor vote
02:58
which is the final vote and that vote
03:01
has always been public all the
03:03
committees however and all the
03:05
discussions and in the hearings all of
03:08
those votes are John F Kennedy when he
03:09
was a senator all those votes were
03:12
secret we don’t have any record of
03:14
Kennedy voting in committee and those
03:17
votes are upwards of thousands per year
03:20
and that’s when all the most sensitive
03:22
work gets done so there there’s very few
03:25
political scholars that would reject the
03:27
idea that committees are where the work
03:30
is gets done that’s where everything
03:32
gets done and then the floor vote is
03:34
considered as said by many the show
03:37
though so you basically already know how
03:39
you’re going to vote so if you’re
03:41
talking about eliminating special
03:42
interest if you’re talking about taking
03:45
on a corporation or etc you’re going to
03:47
do that in committee where the votes
03:49
have always been secret dating straight
03:51
back to the Constitution the writing of
03:53
the Constitution and even before in 1970
03:56
there was something called the
03:57
legislative reorganization
03:59
that fundamentally changed the way
04:01
Congress functioned and our entire
04:03
government talked about what that was
04:05
and what it did right so it’s important
04:07
to realize there’s only two legislative
04:09
reorganization acts in history there’s
04:11
one in 1946 which scholars have written
04:13
endlessly on and then there’s one in
04:16
1970 and think about the name of that
04:18
legislative means law or lawmaking
04:21
reorganization is we’re gonna change it
04:24
act means it’s no longer a bill it was
04:26
passed into law so we are going to
04:28
change how Congress works now notably
04:31
again this is a very important time to
04:33
change Congress because we’re talking
04:35
about a time when inequality has been
04:37
dropping for years incarceration rates
04:39
have been dropping and there’s no
04:41
campaign finance pending and then we
04:43
change it and we have this explosion of
04:47
changes with how Congress is responding
04:51
to corporate power etc the law states a
04:54
number of things the most important of
04:56
which is it says all committees must
04:59
publish their votes if you’re a lobbyist
05:02
in 1969 we know exactly where you are
05:05
you’re in the lobby your name fits who
05:09
you are
05:09
if you’re a lobbyist after this Act
05:12
especially by 73 and 75 when they
05:15
underline this act you’re sitting in the
05:18
committee now they open up these tables
05:21
and you’ve got all the lobbyists and all
05:23
the journalists here and you’re lucky if
05:25
you’ve got a couple constituents in
05:27
these rooms so if you’re talking about
05:28
Armed Service Committee Ways and Means
05:31
committees these are all thousand dollar
05:34
per hour lobbyists sitting there as
05:36
they’re now facing them it seems like
05:39
such an honorable initiative look let’s
05:41
open up Congress let’s make all the
05:43
votes public let’s finally hold these
05:45
people accountable obviously we know
05:47
where it went but what entities were
05:50
even pushing for this to happen and was
05:52
it kind of did it have good intentions
05:55
initially right so it’s always hard to
05:57
know what’s in the hearts of men and who
05:59
was pushing for it behind the scenes and
06:01
the thing these these acts passed
06:04
overwhelmingly so 192 to 6
06:08
but we do know certain organizations
06:10
pushed heavily for this one is the
06:15
afl-cio was involved they were they were
06:17
excited they’re a very liberal group and
06:20
most of the groups that were outwardly
06:22
pushing for a transparency were very
06:23
liberal pushing for more civil rights
06:25
laws or or more union protections etc
06:28
and they wanted to make sure that the
06:30
legislation they were pushing for was
06:32
passing the main person pushing for this
06:35
as a guy named Richard Kahlan Richard
06:37
Colin was also a lobbyist but he knew
06:43
almost all the congressmen he was called
06:45
the 436 member of Congress by a lot of
06:49
people and so we meet him in the
06:51
elevators and he would talk to them all
06:53
about the provisions he was trying to
06:55
pass and they would say uh-oh we’re
06:57
definitely supporting you we’re
06:58
definitely supporting they’d walk into
07:00
the committee then the bill would fail
07:03
and he’d go but I counted you know 60%
07:07
of my you know the votes were gonna come
07:10
my way
07:10
but the votes were flipping on him
07:12
inside of committee and so he was very
07:14
furious about this and that’s exactly
07:18
what he wanted to do he wanted to
07:19
pressure from the outside as a lobbyist
07:22
the way members vote so these are the
07:25
two main groups we don’t have civic
07:27
groups running around with banners we
07:29
want more transparency and certainly at
07:31
that time if you look up in what Google
07:33
whatever it is that measures word usage
07:36
transparencies barely didn’t use
07:37
accountabilities barely even use those
07:39
things have risen in in the 70s and 80s
07:44
and some people have suggested
07:46
they’ve been initiatives pushed by
07:49
corporations that were kicked outside of
07:52
committees and so these groups that
07:55
weren’t making any committees were some
07:57
of the initial transparency proponents
08:00
and so many horrifying trends have taken
08:03
place since 1970 James outline I mean
08:06
just just go over some of them taxes on
08:08
the wealthy up until 1976 the marginal
08:15
tax rates of this effective tax rate so
08:17
not statutory tax rates but what the
08:19
rich are actually paying
08:21
around 74 percent so the wealthier
08:24
paying 74% it’s been high for many years
08:27
certainly went up with World War two as
08:29
soon as they open the Ways and Means
08:32
conference committees and the Finance
08:34
Committee’s which are the committee’s
08:35
where the Senate and the house resolved
08:38
their differences they open those at the
08:40
end of 75 as soon as they open in 76 the
08:44
taxes on the wealthy plummet boom in
08:47
three years it goes down 50 percent it’s
08:48
been flat ever since and so this is what
08:52
we see right as soon as particular
08:55
committees can hope and the legislation
08:57
immediately benefits whatever special
08:59
interests as we know the US government
09:02
was actually the on the forefront of
09:04
environmental legislation so in the 60s
09:07
and right up into 71 we were passing
09:10
very strong environmental bills people
09:13
don’t like to hear that Nixon is who
09:14
created an EPA exactly and Congress is
09:17
very much in support of this and we were
09:19
just doing just the most foundational
09:21
work on the environment and we were
09:23
pissing off corporations they were just
09:25
furious at this and then we start to
09:29
soften as soon as those doors are open
09:31
corporations oil companies coal
09:33
companies who knows what automotive
09:35
companies are coming into these
09:37
committees and all the legislation is
09:39
softening and this is you know income
09:41
inequality skyrocketing the amount of
09:43
lobbyists skyrocketing the amount of
09:45
money that lobbyists are putting in the
09:46
system I mean it just the list goes on
09:48
and on and on the vast majority of
09:51
Americans support Medicare for all or
09:53
some sort of federally funded healthcare
09:54
system the vast majority of Americans
09:56
support net neutrality the vast majority
09:57
of Americans oppose cutting Social
10:00
Security up to 90% I mean the list goes
10:02
on with that and these are obviously big
10:05
examples right yet we see our
10:07
politicians doing the opposite of every
10:10
single thing that the will of the people
10:12
put forward and there’s actually a study
10:15
that proves this that shows that in
10:17
every example the people’s will it
10:19
doesn’t matter because it’s not up to
10:22
the people James can you talk about what
10:24
this study is and what it shows so
10:26
you’ve got Martin gilens Benjamin Page
10:28
come out in 2014 they get
10:31
you know it’s it’s an elaborate and
10:33
beautiful study they gathered tons of
10:35
data I think going back to the 50s they
10:37
haven’t released their work on the older
10:39
data but the recent data shows that if
10:44
the vast majority of Americans support a
10:48
policy proposal or if the vast majority
10:52
of Americans dislike a policy proposal
10:56
that policy proposal has the exact same
10:59
chance of passing so what it says is if
11:02
Americans really like it or if they
11:03
really hate it it still got about a 30%
11:06
chance of passing and the opposite is
11:09
true if we look at elites or special
11:11
interests so if elites or special
11:13
interests really hate a policy proposal
11:15
it’s really unlikely that proposals
11:18
gonna pass and if they really like it it
11:21
gets up to about 60% that it’s gonna
11:23
pass so what it’s basically saying it’s
11:24
it’s easier to kill legislation that it
11:26
is to pass it but it’s also saying that
11:28
elites have much more they find much
11:30
more response to their policy
11:33
suggestions or policy preferences than
11:37
the vast majority of Americans
11:39
interestingly though this is something
11:41
that I looked at a while ago and
11:43
presented in my research I would say
11:45
that Gillan’s and page is data probably
11:49
doesn’t change over time so I don’t
11:51
suspect that this is something that
11:53
changes in 1970 I suspect that we’re
11:56
going to see those numbers be pretty
11:58
flat right through the 50s and if we’re
12:04
talking about a policy proposal that
12:06
Americans are knowledgeable of those are
12:09
actually the policy proposals that
12:11
lobbyists don’t do a lot of work on it’s
12:13
as soon as they and believe me they’re
12:16
polling as well so lobbies are very
12:17
aware when citizens don’t know about a
12:20
tax reform piece or something that’s
12:22
going to change taxation as soon as it’s
12:25
not in the public site that’s where
12:27
you’re gonna see the most lobbyists on
12:29
and there’s been congressmen who have
12:31
said this so the least amount of public
12:33
attention the more lobbyists you get all
12:36
right and we’re talking the American
12:38
public is only going to know about four
12:40
or five
12:41
policy changes per year and so when
12:44
we’re doing thousands upon thousands so
12:46
lobbyists are gonna attack all of those
12:48
and we’ve had the tax reform in 86 and
12:51
we just had the recent one and was it
12:53
2017 in between those two there’s been
12:57
over 20,000 changes to our tax code none
13:00
of that gets covered in the newspaper
13:02
none of that’s going to make the big
13:04
press but the lobbyists are there on all
13:06
of those and the pressures that
13:09
politicians feel are going to be on all
13:11
of those but only from the wealthy or
13:14
the big groups that have a lot of power
13:16
and it makes perfect sense why these
13:18
numbers have remained static because
13:20
it’s not saying how it changed with
13:21
transparency or the weaponization of
13:23
transparency this is just saying this is
13:24
the system that we have we don’t live in
13:26
a democracy we live in an oligarchy
13:28
here’s the data that proves this so what
13:31
the transparency initiative has done is
13:33
just simply weaponize that system I mean
13:36
it’s made us think that we are free I
13:39
think what it says more than anything is
13:42
that Americans mostly don’t know most of
13:44
the policies and even when they know
13:46
something I don’t think they’re very
13:48
familiar with the ins ins out in an ins
13:50
and outs of it so if you talk about the
13:52
dodd-frank you know go talk to people
13:54
about the dodd-frank legislation on the
13:56
street and they’re gonna be like oh yeah
13:58
they did something to the bank’s right
14:00
on for then they’re not gonna know
14:02
anything about the thousands of lines in
14:04
there the elites who are going to be
14:06
affected by dodd-frank of course you’re
14:08
gonna know a lot more about it and so
14:11
we’d love to think that the American
14:13
public is following legislation and
14:15
their understanding legislation we just
14:18
don’t see that at all we’d love to think
14:21
that lobbyists aren’t following
14:23
legislation and they aren’t the ones
14:24
benefiting transparency but that’s
14:26
precisely what we see with the
14:28
initiation of transparency has made
14:30
people more placated into thinking that
14:33
they have more power over time correct
14:35
absolutely
14:36
so with 200 floor votes a year we don’t
14:39
find any citizens following the 200
14:41
floor votes so already back in the 60s
14:44
they were talking about how little
14:45
people followed votes
14:47
so even congressional scholars will tell
14:49
you they don’t follow 200 votes a year
14:52
they don’t even follow 40 votes a year
14:53
likely you don’t
14:55
forty votes a year I never met anyone
14:57
who follows 40 votes a year they
14:59
increased that number in 1972 thousands
15:03
of votes per year you’re talking
15:05
millions and millions of pages just of
15:08
hearings and legislation just to
15:10
decipher one vote and let’s talk about
15:13
bills because you made an obvious but
15:17
very astute point I mean the Bill of
15:18
Rights was how many pages right right
15:21
the Bill of Rights the one that I have
15:22
fits on one page so I mean the bills
15:25
today are stunningly enormous I mean
15:29
thousands of pages a lot of them are
15:31
written directly by these lobbyists and
15:33
how does that fit into the special
15:35
interest versus constituent like let’s
15:37
say I want to be engaged politically
15:40
even back in the 70s I would say it’s
15:42
impossible to follow legislation as a
15:44
constituent so you really have to trust
15:46
your legislator and your legislator
15:48
can’t follow all legislation so what
15:50
they’re gonna do is if they’re gonna
15:51
read something back in the 70s and they
15:53
don’t understand it guess how they’re
15:55
gonna vote hell no because I’ve got no
15:58
pressures to vote on something stupid
15:59
right I can’t read it makes no sense to
16:02
me no one knocked on my door and talked
16:03
to me about it I’m not gonna vote for it
16:06
now if I hand you something that’s a
16:08
thousand pages back in 1970 just give me
16:10
like give me a break I named it have
16:11
time to read it how am I gonna vote for
16:12
this but as soon as you can watch how
16:15
people vote and as soon as my pressure
16:17
is say you’re a Republican and I’m a
16:19
Democrat and I see all the Republicans
16:21
voting for it if I vote for it I might
16:23
get called up on my press anyways right
16:26
oh he’s siding with the Republicans I
16:28
don’t even have to read it I almost
16:30
immediately knee-jerk reaction I have to
16:32
vote against what you guys are voting so
16:33
we get this immediate partisanship but
16:36
I’ve also got pressures from the
16:38
lobbyists to vote for it and therefore
16:40
you could get legislation through that
16:42
no one understands and when I say no one
16:45
no one but the particular special
16:48
interest so complexity Rises page length
16:50
rises the bigger the bill is the easier
16:52
it is to insert these lines that will
16:54
make everyone fall asleep yeah
16:56
constituents are busy figuring out how
16:58
does this affect me and what does it
17:00
disadvantage my community these
17:01
thousands of pages the special interest
17:03
says boom this is this is right
17:06
skewer paragraph so again if the
17:08
citizens can’t understand it boy that’s
17:10
they stand a great chance if people can
17:13
understand it will gets a little tougher
17:14
the National Rifle Association the
17:17
lobbying arm of the gun manufacturing
17:19
industry is in the spotlight for its
17:21
influence in Washington in the midst of
17:23
an epidemic of mass shootings the NRA is
17:26
investments to defeat gun reform which
17:28
is favored by most Americans reached 84
17:31
million dollars in the 2016 election
17:33
alone right-wing Florida Senator Marco
17:35
Rubio was personally confronted by
17:38
survivors of the parklands school
17:39
massacre about his gifts from the NRA so
17:43
senator Rubio can you tell me right now
17:46
that you will not accept a single
17:47
donation from the NRA
17:50
no the answer is the question is that
17:53
people buy into my agenda and I do
17:55
support the Second Amendment and I also
17:57
support the right of you and everyone
17:58
here to be able to go to school and be
18:00
safe and that’s why I support the things
18:02
that I have stood for in the influence
18:08
of these groups comes not from money the
18:10
influence comes from the millions of
18:12
people that agree with the agenda our
18:14
goal here is to move forward so hold on
18:16
for about in the night in the name of 17
18:19
people you cannot ask the NRA to keep
18:22
their money out of your campaign I think
18:24
in the name of 17 people I can pledge to
18:27
you that I will support any law that
18:29
will prevent a killer like this no but
18:31
I’m talking money
18:33
but how lobbyists influence politicians
18:36
is not always as clear and direct and
18:39
marco rubio’s case he’s only received
18:42
about five thousand dollars in direct
18:43
contributions from the NRA but they
18:46
spent over 1 million dollars on his
18:48
re-election campaign
18:49
they also used different forms of
18:52
intimidation against pro-gun reformed
18:54
politicians James D’Angelo further
18:57
explains how these lobbying strategies
18:59
work so surely it comes down to just
19:01
electing the uncorruptible right no I we
19:07
don’t find much evidence that they’re
19:08
corrupt the way money’s used and this is
19:13
all the dark money most of the public
19:16
money and almost all the campaign
19:19
financing is used to intimidate almost
19:24
all of the dark money is used for
19:25
advertising and almost all the
19:27
advertising is negative advertising and
19:29
so if a B for example starts voting
19:32
against my initiatives we’re gonna start
19:36
taking out negative advertising against
19:38
her now if you don’t change your views
19:41
that actually doesn’t bother us that
19:43
much it terrifies everybody else who
19:45
might be voting but if we do that on a
19:50
fairly consistent basis and the NRA does
19:52
that on a ferry a fairly consistent
19:54
basis everybody knows that if they vote
19:56
against the NRA
19:57
they’re gonna find tons of ads in their
19:59
district and the ads aren’t going to be
20:02
about guns they’re going to be on
20:03
whatever would take this person out so
20:06
when Joe Manchin stepped up against the
20:09
NRA when the approval rating for tougher
20:11
gun laws in the US was over 90% when he
20:15
proposed some soft gun legislation the
20:18
NRA started taking out millions of
20:19
dollars of ads against him
20:21
none of the ads were about guns I mean I
20:24
guess I’m it’s going out on a limb to
20:26
say that these people are not corrupted
20:29
because let’s say just the best case
20:31
scenario everyone’s joining the
20:33
legislative body wanting to do good at a
20:36
certain point they know that to keep
20:38
that position they have to keep taking
20:40
the money from their corporate donors
20:41
too because I mean that that’s the sheer
20:43
cost of running and maintaining your
20:45
position
20:46
government so where does I mean I don’t
20:49
see how the bribery isn’t a thing it’s
20:51
much easier for me to start funding this
20:55
guy over here who’s got a long history
20:57
for voting for the tobacco companies and
20:59
fund him and then try and take you out
21:02
with the ton of negative ads and go
21:04
after you on every level possible and
21:06
it’s much cheaper than bribery because
21:10
if I pay you for a vote today are you
21:12
gonna ask for of more money tomorrow of
21:14
course you will but if I get someone
21:16
who’s always voted for some lunatic
21:18
policy that I like and I get them in
21:21
office I’m not gonna have to pay him
21:22
each time yeah I I think that I mean
21:25
just today we have the the sheer amount
21:28
of spending on campaigns has skyrocketed
21:30
so much is over the last ten years where
21:32
you have the Democratic Party actually
21:34
making candidates do Rolodex tests where
21:36
you have to prove that you can raise 250
21:38
grand through the contacts on your phone
21:39
in order to even be backed by the party
21:42
institution right so I guess what I’m
21:43
saying is it almost seems like self
21:45
sabotage because all the people in their
21:48
rolodexes are obviously going to be tied
21:49
to the special interest to the
21:51
corporation so it’s almost like you’re
21:52
shooting yourself in the foot before you
21:53
even get into office it could be I mean
21:55
there that we certainly could expect
21:57
some of that intimidations baked it but
22:00
if you look at Lawrence Lessig or Zephyr
22:02
Teachout are talking about corruption in
22:04
both of their books full books on
22:07
corruption they don’t mention
22:08
intimidation it’s all bribery humans are
22:13
great in intimidation you vote with me
22:16
on this or we talk later that’s legal
22:24
right and everybody knows what that
22:26
means or the NRA after taking Debra
22:28
Maggart out in Tennessee you’re going
22:29
after Joe Manchin doesn’t say anything
22:31
they just tell you they’re watching your
22:33
votes that’s all they say that’s legal
22:36
right and if they tell you they’re
22:38
watching your votes what does that mean
22:39
it means if you vote against them you’re
22:41
gonna have in your district you know
22:44
hundreds of thousands of dollars of ads
22:46
against you
22:46
intimidation is the currency of the
22:48
realm bribery is that’s orphan
22:52
stepsister lastly I mean in a system
22:55
where people truly did have the power
22:57
that they were able to democratize
22:58
themselves and act
22:59
we hold power to account let’s say not
23:01
living in Oleg Archy where corporations
23:03
control everything not living in this
23:05
kind of inevitability of capitalism
23:06
where we see where we are today wouldn’t
23:10
transparency work then if we actually
23:13
could function as the democracy that we
23:16
are all tradition to believe a liquid
23:19
democracy where everybody’s voting on
23:21
everything I mean the Greeks tried that
23:25
it’s pretty hazardous right California
23:28
is very good at trying that we do a lot
23:29
of referendums here in California right
23:31
I hear what you’re saying I just think
23:33
that we’ve gotten to a point today where
23:34
I don’t think closing off transparency
23:36
in the legislature is the end-all be-all
23:38
of the solution I think that there’s a
23:40
bigger system at play which is global
23:43
capitalism I’m not I think you’re I
23:47
think you’re right I mean I think we’re
23:49
there this isn’t the answer to
23:51
everything this doesn’t solve anything
23:53
in fact what I’m doing in Uganda right
23:55
now is because this doesn’t solve
23:56
everything what am I looking at and I
23:59
actually look at there’s one thing it’s
24:02
shocking that no one’s measured this but
24:04
we’re trying to measure this and we’re
24:06
trying to measure just the median net
24:08
worth of legislators the median net
24:11
worth compared to the median net worth
24:13
of the citizens and those numbers are
24:17
always different right so the median net
24:19
worth of the legislators in most
24:21
developing countries is can be a
24:23
thousand times higher than the median
24:25
net worth of citizen this is not a
24:26
transparency or you know legislative
24:29
transparency issue this is a we’re
24:31
electing the elites and somehow the
24:34
elites are getting in office and we’re
24:36
not even measuring that and we suspect
24:38
that just by measuring it we’re gonna
24:40
change how we talk about democracy right
24:41
the fact that we don’t know these
24:43
numbers in Canada we don’t know I’m in
24:46
Brazil we don’t know what a Mexico
24:47
France Sweden Spain none of these
24:50
countries we have these numbers but in
24:52
many of these developing countries the
24:54
difference is over a thousand we suspect
24:57
and the legislators are completely made
25:00
up of the richest people in the country
25:02
well I can tell you exactly how the
25:04
legislation is going to go if you get
25:06
that this isn’t a transparency
25:08
legislative issue
25:09
it’s we’re letting aristocrats
25:13
[Music]