"Show-Me"
the state of Missouri, and
I will show you a microcosm of George Bush's domestic agenda
for
America. Under Governor
Matt Blunt,
Missouri
is rapidly implementing laws reminiscent of the Gilded Age,
when corporations ruled and the people were disposable cogs
in their profit-making machines. Virtually each day I pick
up the newspaper, Blunt has advanced this despicable agenda
still further. Watching my former home state (and current
neighboring state) become an ally to the American plutocracy
in their bid to sweep away the remains of the progressive,
humanitarian advances of the Twentieth Century leaves me
deeply sickened and saddened.
Legislating immorality….
From
the plutocratic point of view, businesses and corporations
simply cannot make their owners, executives, or shareholders
obscenely wealthy enough without breaking the backs of the
poor and working class. For the affluent to afford multiple
multi-million dollar homes, cars that cost more than many
homes, yachts, trophy wives, and jet-setting lifestyles, the
poor must remain extremely poor. Freeing businesses (and
corporations) of pesky impediments like paying taxes, having
to negotiate with labor unions, and legal accountability for
death or injury resulting from their products or services
are essential to ensuring astronomical profits to fulfill
the extravagant "needs" of the rich. Cutting "socialist
government hand-outs" to the poor enables the plutocrats to
give themselves additional tax breaks. In the New
Corporatcracy, the elderly, the working class, victimized
consumers, the homeless, minorities, the disabled, the sick,
and the poor will increasingly discover that they are on
their own as Social Darwinists implement "survival of the
fittest (with the fattest wallets) policies through the
government.
Friends in high places, including Dad and himself….
In
2004, Matt Blunt narrowly won the
Missouri
gubernatorial race by garnering a mere 51% of the popular
vote. Did he
really
win the election though? Unlike George Bush in the 2000
presidential election, he did not need Katherine Harris to
hand him a false victory. He had himself. Missouri Secretary
of State Matt Blunt retained his office through the
election, meaning he certified the results his own narrow
victory in the governor’s race. In Bush-like fashion, Blunt
seized the reins of the state of
Missouri
without an objective measure of how the people had truly
voted. Our wealthy, elite rulers were not taking the chance
that the “herd” would make the “wrong choice”.
Throughout Blunt’s campaign for governor, Bush and Cheney
both heavily endorsed Blunt to ensure that
Missouri
would be fertile ground for instituting their domestic
agenda at the state level. Roy Blunt, Sr., Matt's father, is
the House Majority Whip in the US Congress. From that
position, he wields a great deal of power and has forged
close ties with the Bush administration. While both
Blunts assert that Roy's
status and connections were not factors in Matt's rise to
power in
Missouri, facts and logic belie the
depth of their denial. During Matt's 2000 campaign for
Missouri Secretary of State (the position which
propelled him into the governor's mansion), he received
contributions from numerous sources from outside of
Missouri. State records show
that several of the out of state donors had legislation
beneficial to them under review by Congressional
subcommittees on which Roy Blunt sat. Most reasonable-minded
individuals would call that a conflict of interest, but in a
government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich, it is
business as usual.
Who
were some of these individuals and entities with such a
burning interest in the outcome of the Secretary of State
race in Missouri,
where they did not reside? Executives from Freddie Mac
donated $4,000.00, while two of their lobbyists (who were
from Virginia)
donated $1,000.00 each. A lobbyist for Phillip Morris
donated $1,000.00. Many contributions came from companies
and corporations operating in industries encumbered with
heavy government regulations. Records also indicate that
$65,000.00 of Matt's campaign contributions came from 84 of
Roy's colleagues in Congress. And
Matt Blunt bristles at the implication that he rode his
father's coat-tails into office? If I did not know better,
I would conclude that Bush, Blunt, and major corporate
interests colluded to position Matt to begin imposing their
Social Darwinism at the state level, but in a democracy
based on the “freedom and liberty” we are spreading to Iraq,
this would not be possible.
Now
that Blunt is comfortably nestled into the cozy confines of
the governor's mansion, he has begun to systematically
engage the perverse social agenda of the Bush
administration. In the new "pull oneself up by one’s boot
straps" paradigm, laissez faire capitalism and gross
socio-economic inequality are beginning to predominate in
Missouri. Blunt's pretexts for
creating a haven for avaricious corporations and
dramatically cutting assistance to the poor are to prevent
tax increases and to create jobs in
Missouri. In true Social Darwinian
form, Blunt has rationalized the enrichment of the "haves"
and the abandonment of the "have nots".
"The modern
conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises
in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior
moral justification for selfishness."
-- John
Kenneth Galbraith
Some of Governor Blunt's first targets were those dependent
on Medicaid for their basic health needs. In Blunt's short
tenure, Missouri
is preparing to cut 100,000 from the Medicaid rolls. First
Steps, a $27 million program to aid 8,000 children with
severe disabilities is fading into history. As a part of
this program, the federal government matched the state
dollar for dollar. The funding paid for sorely needed
therapy and equipment for special needs children. Blunt’s
Medicaid cuts will also target children adopted through the
state's foster care program, which will most likely reduce
the number of those willing to adopt children who
desperately need parents. Obviously, in a corporatacracy
like the one Blunt is forging in
Missouri, the poor, the adopted, and
the special needs children (who lack the good fortune of
having been born to affluent parents) do not have the right
to proper medical care.
You can fool some of the people some of the time….
Blunt's justification for the cuts was two-fold. He stated
it would enable him to avoid raising taxes and that it would
reduce fraud in the Medicaid system. Neither assertion
holds water.
Medicaid spending cuts do project the image that Matt Blunt
is a fiscal hero for preventing tax increases. However,
leaving that many people uninsured places a financial burden
of another kind on those fortunate enough to have insurance.
Medical costs for the uninsured receiving treatment without
the ability to pay are passed on to the rest of society
through increases in prices by providers and higher health
insurance premiums. The uninsured people who opt not to get
treatment because they are too poor become more infirm, and
ultimately become a financial drain on society. The lesson
here for the plutocrats is that besides the moral imperative
for society (and hence upon our government, the manager of
society's public coffers and the makers of society's rules)
to care for the weaker and less fortunate, there is a
pragmatic imperative to offer medical insurance to the
poor.
Blunt's specious argument that the Medicaid cuts will reduce
fraud is a pitifully weak when one examines the facts. In
2004, the state of
Missouri
registered 243 cases of Medicaid fraud that cost about $1
million. 974,559 Missourians were on Medicaid. At .02%,
Missouri Medicaid fraud hardly rises to the level of a
crisis or warrants an overhaul of the system. Matt Blunt
needs to go back to the drawing board if he wishes to come
up with a truly convincing justification for his
selfishness.
Why worry about human suffering when there are profits to be
had?
While many of the poor scramble to obtain basic health
services, corporations and businesses are basking in
the radiant sunshine of Matt Blunt's state level
corporatacracy. $250 million in tax credits for businesses
create a virtual paradise. In March, Governor Blunt signed a
law making it more difficult for employees to qualify for
worker's comp benefits. Under Blunt, collective bargaining
rights for state employees are a thing of the past. Is this
a precursor to similar laws aimed at the private sector?
Handing a gift-wrapped package to the insurance industry,
Blunt allowed several executives from major insurance
companies help him interview the finalists to become head of
the Missouri Department of Insurance, the state department
that acts as a watchdog over the insurance industry. Some of
the interviewees were also Blunt campaign donors. Blunt has
made great strides toward a corporatacracy in his short
tenure. Remember the
Chicago
song “Only the Beginning”?
Fortunately for the working people, not all entrepreneurs
agree with the grossly immoral actions of our plutocratic
leaders like Matt Blunt. According to Missouri Budget.org,
Garland Land of Jefferson City wrote:
We own a small
business that collects sales tax on the merchandise we
sell. What most people may not realize is that by state
law we get to keep part of the sales tax we collect. Our
business, like most, is computerized. It just takes a
few minutes each month to complete the form and send the
check to the state. I calculated that the state is
paying us over $800 per hour based upon the amount wee
keep and the amount of time it takes us to process the
form.
I question whether it
is morally right to keep the sales tax when others are
losing services due to the state’s budget problems.
I have decided that
keeping part of the sales tax is not doing justice for
others. We have decided to send 100 percent of the sales
tax we collect to the state. Our decision will not
significantly affect the profit margin of our business
and it will not make much difference for the state
budget, but it is the right thing to do.
I laud Mr. Land for
his stance, and hope that other business owners follow his
lead.
What other tricks
does he have up his sleeve?
Virtually all
consumers and voters are vulnerable to some of Blunts other
"social evolutions". Blunt has paved the way to higher
utility costs by easing restrictions on rate increases.
Thanks to the new governor, it is now more difficult for
victims of medical malpractice to receive compensation and
justice. His tort reforms are even more draconian than the
ones former
Missouri
governor Bob Holden vetoed in 2003 and 2004. Mr. Blunt
vetoed legislation that would have made campaign
contributions more transparent. The man who purportedly did
not ride to office via questionable campaign financing wants
to limit public scrutiny of sources of campaign money. How
astounding!
In keeping with the
tactics of his mentor in
Washington, Governor Blunt weaves
pleasant fictions to pacify the masses. In May, he spent two
days traversing the state to tout his $158 million increase
in education spending, "proving" he made good on his
campaign promise to improve
Missouri
schools. The truth is, he was taking credit for something
that would have happened whether he had been governor or
not. Over 70% of that $158 million stemmed from increased
tax revenue that was already committed to education funding
(i.e. casino taxes). Is Karl Rove on the Blunt payroll?
Tom Kruckemeyer, an
economist with the non-profit Missouri Budget Project
commented:
"All or virtually
all of this money is from tax sources that are dedicated
already to K-12 education, and it is money they had to give
them."
Blunt shows them how
he really feels
Slapping the 650,000
black residents of
Missouri
in the face, Mr. Blunt decided to allow the Confederate flag
to fly at a Higginsville, MO historical site in June. While
one can argue that the flag has multiple meanings, to most
black Americans, and to many others, it is a symbol of
hatred. The designer of the flag was a South Carolina
Congressman who advocated secession from the
Union and was an ardent supporter of slavery,
one of the most evil institutions in mankind's history. Just
as Bush has little regard for the rights or interests of
black Americans (other than social conservatives like
Condoleezza Rice or Clarence Thomas), Governor Blunt has
shown his lack of concern for this segment of the
population.
Cake is made to eat,
isn’t it?
Blunt’s governorship in
Missouri
makes it apparent that Mr. Bush intends to apply the
“Trickle Down Theory” in a new way. Under the rule of the
Social Darwinists, only the "fittest" (and richest) possess
the "inalienable Rights of Life,
Liberty, and the pursuit of
Happiness". Blunt exemplifies that their power grab is
“trickling down” to the level of state government. With the
current Supreme Court vacancy, the plutocrats will move to
complete their inevitable seizure of control over the third
branch of the federal government. Some have even raised the
possibility that Marbury vs.
Madison
will be overturned, rendering the Judicial Branch virtually
insignificant. Middle and working class Americans are
witnessing their final shield from tyranny disintegrate.
However, the plutocratic and corporate interests are not
content simply dominating the federal government. They are
shrewdly seeding state governments with men like Matt Blunt
to exercise their agenda. To satisfy many amongst their
conservative, libertarian constituency, they will need to
cede more rights to the states. With men like Matt Blunt
waiting in the wings to further the plutocratic agenda, they
can safely diffuse their power while still enjoying the
delectable fruits of Social Darwinism.
America's wealthy are
setting out to prove the axiom that you
can have your
cake and eat it too. Fortunately, it is not too late for the
working people, poor, and minorities to prevent that from
happening, and I believe we will.
Jason Miller is a freeance activist writer with a degree in
liberal arts. He is a husband and a father to three
boys. His affiliations include Amnesty International, the
ACLU and the Americans United for Separation of Church and
State. He welcomes responses at
willpowerful@hotmail.com or comments on
his blog.