Jason Miller

By Jason Miller

Like wolves among sheep, America's Plutocracy preys on the weaker and less fortunate members of society. Since America's founding, they have leveraged their economic power to dominate the government and the media, the vehicles through which they advance their avaricious agenda. In early American history, they employed an imperialistic foreign policy to ensure the expansion of US boundaries and interests. Along the way, they virtually annihilated the Native American population. Once they had attained as much of the North American continent as they were able, they used “Manifest Destiny” and the “Communist threat” as rationalizations to invade other nations (i.e.The Philippines) and to support ruthless dictators in other nations (Augusto Pinochet in Chile) who have tortured and killed millions. Recently, legislation favoring corporations over workers and consumers has sharply diminished the power of labor unions and opportunities for small entrepreneurs, while historically, corporations have maimed and killed their employees and their customers with hazardous working conditions and unsafe products. The wealthy elite class has dominated American politics via dynasties like the Bush clan and the Kennedy family. The predominance of regressive over progressive taxes has virtually guaranteed that the majority of America's riches remains in the hands of the Plutocrats. Throughout American history, the Plutocracy has severely victimized black Americans, through enslavement and through ongoing gross social injustices. Latin American immigrants face open discrimination for their language and cultural differences while armed vigilantes calling themselves "Minute Men" now patrol the US-Mexican border. Other racial minorities, some religious groups, Gays and the disabled also face discrimination and suppression of rights at the hands of the white, "straight", "Christian" Plutocracy dominating the government and media in the United States.

Suffering in silence

Overshadowed and often forgotten is the plight of yet another minority group which has suffered tremendously at the hands of the ruling elite. The “Land of the Free” has not been particularly kind to the mentally ill. People with mental disorders have faced many forms of abuse and discrimination before and since our founders penned the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Most early colonists in America viewed the mentally ill as demon-possessed. Mental illness was considered to be a weakness of the spirit. Some thought the mentally ill were "magically" influenced by the moon, hence the term "lunacy". Acting on the primal emotions that drive most bigotry, early Americans banished "lunatics" from the community for life by confining them under deplorable conditions. Viewing people with mental illnesses as sub-human animals, their "keepers" had few reservations about abusing them physically and mentally, “straight-jacketing” them, and keeping them shackled almost all of their lives. Early treatments to "cure" the mentally ill involved such enlightened methods as dunking them in ice until they slipped from consciousness, inducing vomiting and "bleeding" patients. Draining the "bad blood" from the patient often killed the patient or left them incapacitated for life.

In the early 19th Century, Europe introduced more humane ways of dealing with those with mental illness. Patients in asylums (early mental hospitals) were viewed and treated as human beings. Facilities offering comfortable beds, artwork, landscaping, recreational activities and opportunities to work replaced the brutal conditions of the asylums’ predecessors. Unfortunately, this ray of sun for those with mental illness was short-lived in the United States. After the Civil War, America's state institutions were flooded with veterans suffering from what we know today as post traumatic stress disorder. Crushing over-population led to the return of ice baths and shackles, and the experimental use of opium as a drug treatment.

For a brief period in the late 19th Century, there was a vastly increased number of asylums and markedly improved care in the US. Unfortunately, asylums and institutions accepted virtually anyone, and many people abused the ease of entry as a means to get free food and shelter. This caused the asylum populations to sky-rocket beyond capacity. This renewed crisis of over-crowding was also exacerbated by people and communities institutionalizing their "unwanted". Once again, barbarism returned as shock baths and electro-convulsive therapy became the treatments of choice.

Horror masquerading as healing

In 1935, Antonio Moniz spawned one of the most savage, inhumane "medical procedures" in human history. He performed a type of psychosurgery which involved removing a portion of the frontal lobe of a patient's brain in an attempt to rid them of unwanted anxieties, neuroses, or psychoses. This notorious procedure, known as the lobotomy, usually resulted in impairment of the patient’s sex drive, spontaneity, impulse control, and problem-solving capacity, leaving them a mere shadow of their former selves. Despite the high risks and extremely disturbing after-effects associated with the treatment, the US medical profession raced to embrace the lobotomy as a technique to treat patients with serious illnesses.

Dr. Walter Freeman invented and popularized the Tran orbital lobotomy, which involved placing an ice pick just above the patient's tear duct, driving it into the frontal lobe with a rubber mallet, and wiggling it around to decimate the frontal lobe of the brain. Hailed as inexpensive, simple and non-invasive, US care-givers performed over 40,000 lobotomies between 1936 and 1950. Freeman traversed the country (in his van which he called his "lobotomobile") shamelessly touting his procedure. His advocacy for the "ice pick lobotomy" as a "cure all" even led to its use to manage misbehavior in children. Rosemary Kennedy represents a classic high profile case of the abuse of this twisted form of treatment. Her father, Joe Kennedy, patriarch of the Kennedy clan, authorized a lobotomy for his 23 year old daughter in 1941 to "cure" her mild mental problems. The ice pick lobotomy left her profoundly retarded. For the innovation of this human butchery, Moniz won a Nobel Prize in 1949. Family members of lobotomy victims have lobbied the Nobel Foundation to revoke his award, but their pleas have fallen on deaf ears.

Not without hope

Fortunately for the seriously mentally ill, in 1952 the medical community introduced a drug called Thorazine, which alleviated serious symptoms such as delusions and hallucinations. While it was later discovered that Thorazine had significant side effects, it did enable seriously debilitated patients to gain a reasonable capacity to function on their own, and more importantly, opened the door to the field of psychopharmacology. Thorazine was the first of many psychotropic medicines which have greatly enhanced the lives of the mentally ill. New hope had dawned for those with mental illness to gain dignity, rights, and involvement in the community. Perhaps equally as significant was the fact that lobotomies were reduced to an ugly stain on the pages of human history.

Equally as fortunate for the mentally ill is that advocacy for their cause does exist. Clifford Beers, a Yale graduate from Connecticut, was institutionalized in 1900. In 1908, he wrote his autobiography called A Mind That Found Itself in which he exposed the abusive and incompetent nature of health care for the mentally ill. His work spawned a movement on behalf of the mentally ill to improve attitudes about mental illness and its victims, to improve care for the mentally ill, and to promote mental hygiene and health. By the mid Twentieth Century, a national organization known as the National Mental Health Association had grown into a powerful force for educating the public and advocating Congress on behalf of the mentally ill. In 1953, they created a symbol of hope and affirmation for those suffering from mental illness by casting a bell from metal restraints that had been used in psychiatric institutions across the country.

The bell’s inscription reads:

"Cast from shackles which bound them, this bell shall ring out hope for the mentally ill and victory over mental illness."

With a strong advocacy group, psychotropic medications to alleviate severe symptoms, the end of the lobotomy, and the end of the use of other barbaric tactics like shackling, the mentally ill had overcome many obstacles to their dignity and equality. However, new ones were quick to emerge.

Darkness abates, but deep shadows remain

Exercising misguided intentions, President Kennedy signed the Community Mental Health Centers Act in 1963. His stated purpose was to integrate institutionalized individuals back into the population. From that day until 1980 when the law expired, the population in the nation's mental health institutions dropped by 70%. With inadequate numbers of community mental health centers, psychiatrists, and therapists to help the newly released mentally ill individuals integrate into the community, many of them wound up living on the street or in prisons.

"Increasingly, individuals with mental illnesses are left to fend for themselves on the streets, where they victimize others or, more frequently, are victimized themselves. Eventually, many wind up in prison, where the likelihood of treatment is nearly as remote."

---Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan in the Congressional Record, July 12, 1999

In 2003, Human Rights Watch issued a study that showed that jails and prisons house three times as many mentally ill people as do psychiatric institutions. People with mental illnesses are 64% more likely to get arrested than those who are mentally healthy. The Los Angeles County jail system and Rikers Island act as the two largest inpatient institutions for the psychiatric patients in America, housing 3,400 and 3,000 respectively. The Justice Department itself has acknowledged that 16% of American jail and prison inmates (283,000) suffer from a serious mental illness. Sadly, the mentally ill residing in the penal system are often brutally abused by other inmates while their severe psychological maladies go virtually unattended. Perhaps Kennedy's move to de-institutionalize was not so altruistic after all. Now that prisons house more mentally ill than psychiatric institutions, the Plutocratic American government stands to profit from institutionalizing them. The prison industrial complex provides ridiculously cheap labor to major corporations, work for architectural firms and contractors to build new prisons, profits for suppliers of inmate necessities, and enables the existence of large corporations (i.e. CCA and Wackenhut) which governments contract for prison administration. Prevention and treatment of mental illness cost money, but it is imperative that a strong, enlightened and compassionate society absorb that cost rather than punishing those with an affliction and profiting from their suffering.

Of the 3.5 million homeless in America, an estimated 25% are mentally ill. Some need to be institutionalized. Others simply need community mental health centers to provide them with the necessary tools for coping. Some estimates show that 93% of the 875,000 mentally ill homeless could live independently and respectably if they had the proper government assistance. Instead, many are living under bridges and eating from garbage dumpsters in the world’s wealthiest nation. A government that spends $500 billion each year building armies and weapons (half of the military expenditures of the entire planet), and chooses not to increase funding which would provide a roof, food, and some human dignity to almost a million of its people reflects how morally bankrupt America's Plutocrats truly are.

Ignorance, fear, and bigotry fuel a struggle for equality

Discrimination is another bleak reality which the mentally ill face living in this "beacon of liberty" to the rest of the world. Insurance companies are the first in line to serve inequitable treatment to those with mental illness. Many insurance plans place restrictions on mental health benefits that do not exist with respect to physical maladies. For example, private insurers generally allot a limited number of days per year for inpatient mental health services while allowing virtually unlimited inpatient days for general health problems. Because mental illness often interferes with a person's capacity to work, many of the mentally ill are uninsured. Medicaid, the government stop gap for the uninsured, will not pay for stays in state psychiatric hospitals, motivating states to deny patients the institutional care they need. Since Medicaid was originated in 1965, the population of inpatients in state psychiatric hospitals diminished from 500,000 to 60,000 in 1999. If you remain unconvinced that insurance companies discriminate against people with mental conditions, consider the fact that under our current system, 66% of people with a diagnosable mental disorder do not get treatment, while only 5% of those with a serious disorder receive adequate treatment. Ultimately, a society is only as strong as its weakest members, and it is obvious that America is doing very little to strengthen the mentally ill.

Despite the fact that 25% of American families are affected by mental illness, and in a given year estimates show that about 20% of Americans over 18 are diagnosed with a mental illness, shameful social stigmas still dog the mentally ill. The Americans with Disabilities Act, which became law in the early 1990's, has done little to improve the quality of life for the mentally ill, who qualify for protection under this federal law. Employers are often unwilling to hire or train the mentally ill due to stereotypes that they are incapable or dangerous. Ignoring federal mandates to tend to the employment needs of the mentally ill, state agencies have all but ignored them. Surveys indicate that the general public considers the mentally ill to be the least desirable segment of the disabled community, rating them below people with mental retardation and substance abuse problems. While statistics indicate that very few suffering from mental illness are violent, the media perpetuates the myth in the public mind that the mentally ill are dangerous by placing glaring spot-lights on those few who are (i.e. John Hinckley, Jr.)It would seem that American attitudes toward the mentally ill have not evolved all that much over the years. Much like the prejudice that exists against blacks and other minorities, bias against those with mental disorders become more covert because it is no longer "politically correct". Since bigotry and cowardice often go hand in hand, most of the grossly intolerant have gone undercover. While the bigotry may be hidden, it remains a powerful obstacle to individuals with mental illness.

The mentally ill also find their status as human beings diminished at the voting booth throughout much of America. While each of the 44 states prohibiting the mentally ill from voting has a different law, most of the prohibitions apply to individuals found to be "mentally incompetent" and placed under legal guardianship by the court. Collectively, these oppressive laws affect 1.2 million people. Many state constitutions use such denigrating terms as "idiots" and "insane" to describe those with mental illness. In two states, Massachusetts and Minnesota, all it takes to lose one's right to vote is to be placed under legal guardianship. With assistance in understanding the issues and balloting process, many of the "mentally incompetent" could vote. However, in 88% of the states of our nation, all men are not created equal. If we are to truly strive to embody the ideals of the two hallowed documents which forged our nation, we need to allow and empower the mentally ill to participate in the voting process.

Still more hindrances to mental wellness

Several factors coalesce to deter or discourage the mentally ill from seeking proper treatment. I have already discussed the barriers erected by social stigma and inadequate insurance coverage. Yet another barrier is false propaganda perpetrated against therapists, counselors, and psychiatrists. A myriad of groups, led prominently by the "Church" of Scientology, decry the mainstream treatment of mental illness as oppressive, a form of "quackery", abusive, and deceptive. Their complaints include that the diagnoses that mental health professionals use are fraudulent labels on existential life crises or alternate means of interpreting the world and that psychotropic medications prescribed by psychiatrists are "toxic" and have long-term detrimental effects on a patient's well-being. While historically the mental health profession had provided woefully inadequate and abusive treatment to the mentally ill (i.e. lobotomies), over the last 30 years, they have evolved into a humane, effective resource for the mentally ill to alleviate their suffering and to manage their conditions. Certainly there are unethical individuals working in the profession (as with any human endeavor), there are psychotropic drugs developed which have dangerous side effects, and the pharmaceutical industry is rife with corrupt ties with the Plutocracy governing the United States, but the negative aspects of the mental health industry do not negate the fact that many caregivers and medications provide the tools and relief that the mentally ill need to find the dignity, peace and capacity to move toward self actualization which they deserve. The mental health profession is not the only legitimate means of management and recovery available to the mentally ill. There is certainly room for them to incorporate self help activities and twelve step work into their spiritual/intellectual regimen for management and recovery along with the tools and medication they receive from mental health professionals. Unfortunately the false propaganda disseminated by entities like Scientology, a cult based on the "teachings" of a science fiction writer, deters some of the mentally ill from seeking help from a professional community made up of individuals who have spent years studying human behavior, the human mind, mental illness, therapeutic tools for coping with mental illness, and psychotropic medications to help alleviate the symptoms of mental maladies.

Means to minimize suffering are at hand

Increases in federal funding to allow for larger monthly stipends of SSI (the form of social security in place to assist the disabled) and food stamps (or Vision cards), expanded Medicaid benefits to include inpatient psychiatric treatment at state facilities, federal assistance to provide a more comprehensive community mental health system, less incarceration and more treatment for the mentally ill, stronger efforts to overcome the efforts of groups like Scientology by reaching out to the mentally ill to get them to engage with professional mental health care providers, and stronger enforcement of the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) are necessary steps to integrate the mentally ill into our society as productive citizens rather than banishing them to the street or locking them into prisons. As a members of the human race, are our leaders too blind to see that diverting a fraction of the obscene amount spent on the military industrial complex to alleviate the suffering of the mentally ill in our nation is a moral imperative? It is unlikely that the moral issues concern them, but pragmatically, ignoring a problem which affects the 53 million Americans who suffer from mental illness (in some form) is bound to lead to a bitter harvest for the entire nation, including the Plutocrats, since they depend on their underlings to prop them up by laboring, paying taxes to feed the military industrial complex, and fighting their imperialistic wars

Guns get reloaded while butter gets the axe

Sadly, the reality is that under Bush's proposed budget for 2006, the mentally ill will suffer. As they have in many areas, the Plutocrats continue to turn back the clock on the social reforms of the Twentieth Century. Despite its inadequacies in some areas, Medicaid is still the largest source of public funding for the mentally health services. Bush has proposed $60 billion in Medicaid cuts over 10 years, which would dramatically reduce access to sorely needed services for the mentally ill. The axe is set to diminish the budget for the Center for Mental Health Services, which sponsors PATH (a program providing services to prevent homelessness amongst the mentally ill) and federal services aiding the mentally ill in asserting their rights. Programs mandated by the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a federal law requiring states to implement special education services) will be significantly short-funded.

Chop, chop, chop…where will the axe fall next?

In spite of the Plutocratic call to patriotism, funding to the Veterans Administration will virtually assure a decline in mental health services provided to veterans. Assistance to the mentally ill in training for, finding and maintaining employment will diminish. Funding for housing for the disabled will be cut in half. While a majority of discrimination complaints filed with HUD and other fair housing enforcement agencies are filed by the disabled, the Plutocrats are ready to cut the funding for fair housing enforcement by 20%. A new federal law (The Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act) to provide money to states to emphasize treatment over incarceration will receive no money under Bush's proposed budget. (Think IDEA, No Child Left Behind, rapacious Plutocrats, and appeasement of the masses….then look for a pattern) The Byrne Discretionary Grants, which provide money to states for crisis intervention and mental health courts, will become history. Juvenile justice programs, which can provide early intervention to prevent the mentally ill from becoming future victims of the prison industrial complex, will be cut by 46%. While the mentally ill find themselves staring at an austere federal assistance package, the plutocrats are increasing military spending and devoting 30.7% of government spending to the military (this figure includes military expenditures embedded in the budgets of the Departments of Justice and Energy and of NASA). Is this what “compassionate conservatism” looks like?

A nation in desperate need of soul-searching

As Matthew Rothschild (the editor of the Progressive) so aptly pointed out, it is important for vehement critics of America's Plutocracy to acknowledge that the United States is not responsible for all evil acts of humanity. I agree with him. I recognize that many other nations and societies throughout history have committed atrocities and contributed to the darker chapters of humanity. There are other nations and rulers in the world today perpetrating crimes against humanity. However, as an American with a conscience and a powerful desire for the proliferation of human rights and social justice, I will continue to invest a great deal of energy into helping to expose the evils perpetrated by our government, as most of them have been white-washed from mainstream books and media. The bloated, corrupt government of the United States of America spends $500 billion per year on its "glorious" military industrial complex to ensure that it our Plutocratic rulers maintain their possession of much of the world's wealth and domination over the world. When they do provide military or financial aid to other nations, it is with the covert (and sometimes overt) purpose of furthering the interests of the Plutocrats, and often results in suffering and death for many (i.e. “collateral damage” caused by the US military operations). Hypocrisy reigns as the world’s largest terrorist state perpetrates imperialistic wars like the one in Iraq under the banner of "moral superiority". That same "moral superiority enslaved a race of people and nearly decimated the indigenous population of North America. The sad part is that America could be the moral leader of the world. As a people, Americans need to find a way to meet our fellow citizens of the Earth as equals and to channel our vast resources toward bettering humanity and the planet on which we live. A great place to start would be to ensure the rights, dignity, and well-being of our own people, including the oft-forgotten mentally ill. ---posted July 3, 2005

Let's Be Blunt:
Bush's Proxy is Spreading Social Darwinism to the State Level

by Jason Miller

"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 we 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. --posted July 26, 2005

The views expressed are the writer's own and do not necessarily reflect those of Bush Watch.

Bush Watch is a daily political internet magazine based in Austin, Texas, paid for and edited by Politex, a non-affiliated U.S. citizen. Contents, including "Bush Watch" and "Politex," (c) 1998-2005 Politex. The views expressed herein and the views in stories that you are linked to are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Bush Watch. Permission of author required for reprinting original material, and only requests for reprinting a specific item are considered. The duration of the working links is not under our control. Bush Watch has not reviewed all of the sites linked to our site and is not responsible for the content of any off-site pages or any other sites linked to our site. Your linking to any other off-site pages or other sites from our site is at your own risk. Send all e-mail to Politex.

FORGOTTEN VICTIMS OF AMERICA'S PLUTOCRACY