Daily Times

AS is typical of any American political issue, the two sides of the debate are really just one side. Much of it is just noise; meaningless noise. In the hubbub, the public loses sight of the real issue, failing to ask the real questions. For Example, the noise about the issue of Ukraine concerned putting sanctions on Russia and showing military might through NATO deployments nearby. There was a third question almost never asked: Why should the United States be concerned with what Russia does in Ukraine? Why show military might or impose punitive sanctions over Russia? What’s called public debate in the United States is really debating those angles of an issue that aren’t opposing.

The current noise emanating from America concerns possible collusion between Russia and the Trump associates, where the Russians may have given damaging information about Hillary Clinton to the Trump campaign, costing her the presidency. Robert Mueller III has been assigned to investigate the matter. Trump may be Putin’s man in Washington. New facts keep popping up about Donald Trump Jr. and his brother in law Jared Kushner, having met with some important Russians at the Trump Tower in June 2016.

Without going further into the details of the evolving story, let us just assume that Trump is guilty and may even be indicted as legal memos of Leon Jaworski and Kenneth W. Starr suggest. Jaworski was the Watergate special counsel investigating president Nixon, while Starr was the independent counsel investigating the president Clinton. Allow me to confess that I am no fan of Trump. Like many Americans, the choice for me wasn’t between the candidate I liked versus the candidate I didn’t like. The choice really was about the candidate I disliked versus the candidate I disliked more. I wanted the lesser of the two evils: Hillary.

Interference in election is a serious matter. The question in America right now is whether Putin did or did not influence the American presidential election? Well, there is a third question: Is there anything else that might influence the American presidential and non-presidential elections more than what Putin can only dream of? The role of money is not new in American politics. However, in the wake of the US supreme Court decision in the Citizens United v FECcase in 2010, it has become legal for unlimited cash to manipulate American elections. In the 5-4 court decision, the majority opinion argues that corporations have the same First Amendment rights as individuals. Political Action Committees (PACs) existed before with some limitations on their donations. But Citizens United case paved the way for Super PACs with virtually no limitations on the size of donation to a candidate during an election campaign.

The new normal is for corporations to drench the election campaign with massive amount of cash using Super PACs to influence elections. Positive campaign ads for the blue eyed candidate are aired, while at the same time malicious ads are aired targeting the opponent. The guy with more money at his disposal usually wins. The winner then has to put his weight behind the kind of legislation that will help the sugar daddy corporation. The vicious cycle goes on. In the meantime, the biggest losers are the American public and the American democracy. People’s speech is words while corporations’ speech is cash. Guess who is going to win, cash or words?

Americans have harmed America more than the outsiders. Post 9/11, the US leadership has been on a destructive course, violating the Constitution and eroding Americans’ individual liberties. Many Super PACs make hefty donations to election campaigns of the Republicans, the party that worships the Second Amendment right: the right to bear arms. The National Rifle Association (NRA) spends a stupendous amount of money in creating awareness about the importance of self-defense and the Second Amendment. The irony is that gun violence claims more American lives than terrorism, yet the Super PACs supporting gun rights are not deemed dangerous.

According to a 2016 study by Alex Nowrasteh at the Cato Institute, about 3,024 Americans have died from 1975 through 2015 due to foreign born terrorists. This number includes the 2,983 deaths from 9/11. In the same period, guns claimed 1.34 million American lives. That’s about as many Americans as died in all the wars in American history since the American Revolution. Notwithstanding, the mindset is: foreign terrorist is more dangerous than the domestic shooter.

Similarly, domestic buying of the White House isn’t considered detrimental to American democracy. However, foreign meddling to influence the election outcome is deemed a more sinister plot to harm America and its democracy. Strange logic!

Now, while Putin’s role in influencing the election is not proven yet, Money’s role has a corrosive effect on the American democracy. Putin’s alleged hacking is no free speech and is earning critique. Corporations’ free speech is earning more speech (cash). The comedy doesn’t end there. The United States has for decades interfered in elections around the world, engineering election outcomes, changing regimes, invading sovereign nations, assassinating politicians and so forth. The US overthrew democratically elected Prime Minister Muhammad Mosaddeq of Iran in 1953, supported juntas in Latin America, supported military coups (Egypt, Pakistan and elsewhere), propped dictatorships and monarchies in the Middle East, to name a few. Yet, America makes noise if she is given a taste of her own medicine.