Introducing: The Accountability Party

http://whimsicaldog.blogspot.com/2011/03/accountability-party.html

“The Accountability Party? What’s that?” you ask, puzzled, thinking you’ve missed some newsworthy “announcement”. You haven’t.

The Accountability Party is my little fantasy, created at this most opportune moment, when the Dems and Repubs are both out of favor. The Accountability Party is intended to be broad-based, having only two planks, so as to be robustly resistant to destruction by fragmentation.

The AP’s two planks are Accountability and Jobs. Every other issue is relevant ONLY as seen through the lens of these two concerns. Otherwise the AP takes no position.  “No position” means NO POSITION.  No position means being “agnostic” on EVERYTHING else. Individual AP members have their own views of course, but as a unified organization, the AP takes no position on: abortion, taxes, gay marriage, gun rights, defense policy, campaign finance, racial discrimination, immigration, terrorism, hate-speech, Israel, education policy, environmentalism, global warming, etc.

The two issues to which the AP devotes its exclusive focus are: accountability and jobs.

ACCOUNTABILITY

No one is above the law. Everyone, but in particular persons in high position who have traditionally ‘enjoyed’ immunity from prosecution, will now have their get out of jail free cards voided.

And JOBS: everyone who wants a paycheck gets a paycheck. EV-REE-ONE.

Now you might well ask — certainly others will — “How you gonna implement the jobs program, and more to the point, how you gonna pay for it?” To which I reply, “You must always remember that the AP subordinates ALL OTHER ISSUES to paychecks/jobs and accountability, so the details of the fiscal policy behind the “JOBS” commitment is for the most part irrelevant. That said, the Treasury has a machine that prints checks, so the policy is secured, “Move right along. Nothing to see here.” Whatever may be the details required to reconcile the jobs program with fiscal reality, the program itself is in stone, and non-negotiable. For the curious though, I would state the obvious: print the money, borrow the money, or tax someone. In terms of practical economics, it would be quite simple: The more robust the private sector economy, the greater the proportion of jobs it provides. The rest to be provided by govt, and financed,… however. (Personally, I like a progressive income tax, or a flat tax based on net worth, or a financial transaction tax, but I’ll go along with whatever the AP figures out AFTER THE ELECTIONS HAVE BEEN WON.)

A major innovation: the AP does not conduct its campaigns by traditional methods. No TV, no radio, no interviews with mainstream journalists. TV, radio, and other conventional media are corporate. They are part of the illegitimate mainstream corporate and political power. They are part of the political opposition, they are gatekeepers of the process, and if you pay them for TV and radio ads, then you are feeding your political adversaries. The AP therefore, chooses to conduct its campaigns DIRECTLY with the voters, over the internet, no gatekeeper, no middleman — no corporate mediation-for-profit of the political process. A not-for-profit political process is crucial to eliminating corporate/govt corruption and restoring a healthy society. In this way, the AP takes money out of the political process.

There’s more, but this is a start.

Jeff Davis: jrd1415@yahoo.com

Tweet this message.  Let’s get things moving.

Innovations

Please note that these posts are, with the exception of the first, in reverse chronological order, that is, latest first.  But currently, I’d like them read in the order posted.  So after the first, read them bottom to second from top.  Which means right now, go to the last post, and start there.

Innovations

First innovation is  the way The Accountability Party proposes to conduct campaigns: without money.  Without money, without pundit interviews, and without commercial media advertising.  The Accountability Party will use the internet to contact and organize, and then meet with voters directly, either in person or online.

Give this some thought.  The intent is to bypass what has been perhaps the single greatest structural defect in democratic politics since the beginning of democratic politics: the control of political power by money,ie by the wealthy.

Now I’ve nothing against the wealthy or against wealth, but the US Constitution puts forth an idea that I find appealing for its fair-mindedness.  It’s there in the preamble:

We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare [as in everyone’s welfare].

Promote the welfare of all,…equally.

And later, restated (as I see it) in the Gettysburg Address: …of the people, by the people, and for the people…[as in all the people]

I take this to mean that under the constitution, every person is equal, without regard to how much money they have.  But reality is inherently “uneven”, and humans by nature competitive.  So because political campaigns cost money, under the current system, those who bankroll those campaigns get served first, and when the dust has settled, corporations and other wealthy “agents” end up “owning” the govt.   And the notion of equal representation, a govt of the people, by the people, and for the people becomes a govt of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy.  One man one vote becomes one dollar one vote.

Without fanfare, the accountability Party disposes of this defect.  The internet connects the party to the voters, and internet access replaces the expense previously needed to pay the commercial media middleman.  The problem of campaign finance just up and disappears, because campaign finance disappears.  Think on it.  It’s a major innovation.  A huge improvement.  A radical improvement.  The moneyed class removed from their ages old position of political dominance.  Could be a good thing: the placing of all economic classes on an equal political footing.   Genuine democracy finally enabled.  Or not.  At least one person has voiced a dissenting opinion to the effect that money would fight back, would rush onto the internet and assert itself as always.    That it would fight back is beyond question, but insofar as the internet is a democratizing innovation, the final outcome remains unknown.  This much is clear, internet mediated politics is coming, and with it a new equilibrium in the political balance.

Next: the second innovation, broad-based single party governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Some more

The executive is in charge of the Justice Dept, which is headed up by the Attorney General’s office, with Federal prosecutors below.   The FBI  investigates cases for these two,  who then prosecute, …when called for,…and at the discretion of the prosecutor, which is to say at the discretion of the president, his boss.  This is the highest put-them-in-jail team there is.  In the US, certainly.  That is, according to the Constitution.  So the president is the ultimate “Book ’em, Dano” guy.

But we’re a long way from 1787.

The quaint old Constitution has no juice anymore.  It’s been so routinely abused, ignored, and out-maneuvered that everyone seems in on the scam.  “My lawyer says it’s okay.”  “Yes Mr. President.”  “Nothing to see here.  Move right along.”  “Yes, Mr. President.”

“How votes the Congressman from the eighth district of Virginia?”  “I vote aye, on The Authorization to Use Military Force.”

“Which law shall we use today?”  “What does it say?”  “What do you want it to say?”  “I want it to say, “Yes , Mr. President.” ”   “Well then, that’s just what it says.”  “Thank you, Mr. Attorney General.”  “Yes, Mr. President.”

That’s why it’s so ridiculous to imagine the president enforcing the law,…or obeying it.   That’s just not the way the world works.  Serious people understand that.  That’s why they’re called grown-ups.

But people go into the voting booth every few years and vote for a president.  They can write down any old name.  If enough people write down the same name, that guy gets the job.  Theoretically, I’m saying.

And when he says, “Book ’em, Dano!”– he can do that, remember — a process is set in motion.  Like a law of nature.   Theoretically.

It seems radical.  The notion of the President obeying the law.  It shouldn’t, but it does.  Why is that?  Why is it that, for The President, obeying the law, same as anybody else, just well, doesn’t… doesn’t  compute? (Now clearly, plenty of folks break the law pretty regularly, but when they do, and someone notices, they get a dose of “the process”.)

And the notion of the President enforcing the law?  Well that would be… unexpected,…on account of all his mafia-like law-breaking buddies.  Breaking the law on the country’s behalf, and on his orders.  Can’t arrest them.  What’s the sense in that?.  It’d be like arresting himself.  Never been done.  Not gonna happen.  No “perp walk”, no going to jail, for any of the top-most folks, those conducting matters of state.  So they’ve got this unwritten deal, the Dems and Repubs.  No one in the political class gets arrested.  Impeached maybe, but not arrested.  You started doing that and where would it end?  Everyone would have to go to jail.  Can’t have that.  Who would run things?  The Accountability Party, that’s who!

On the world stage, govts are like little mafias, lawless powers.  There’s just no world cop to keep them in check.  So only the other lawless mafias can step in.  So, with all that lawlessness runnin’ loose in the world, government officials must remain free, free of the law, free to act, free to counter the lawlessness of any of the other equally lawless state adversaries with a dose of “back at you”.   They mustn’t be hobbled by prissy legalisms.  The nation wouldn’t be safe.  At least, that’s what the agents of the state say.

“Perps” is what I say.

So, “Book ’em, Dano’ is what the president can say,…if he ever decided to.  I’m thinkin’ you’d be seein’ some seriously surprised “grown-ups”.  And some serious “messiness”.  But hey, new paradigms with new rules tend to get messy.  Remain calm and take a deep breath.  This too shall pass.

“Book ’em , Dano!”  “Book ’em all, Dano!”

It’s not about revenge.  It’s about escaping the long since overgrown entanglement of corruption, and then starting out with a clean slate.

This is the quality of Accountability.