DMI Blog

Kia Franklin

“E Pluribus Screw ‘Em” is our new political/legal climate

Cross-posted from OpenLeft:

Exxon drags its feet for nearly two decades after helping inflict one of history’s most devastating oil spills ever, and the Supreme Corp—-ahem, I mean Court-— renders a 5-3 decision slashing punitive damages down to a paltry few days’ profits. Meanwhile, Congress' capitulation/"compromise" on FISA will essentially roll back all the hard work of folks like Senators Feingold and Dodd to protect Americans' Constitutional right not to be illegally spied on.

These are two of the most egregious of a recent influx of events that signal a quiet chipping away at the American public’s safety, economic security, and legal rights. It's being done through destruction or manipulation of the rule of law, and it's what Stephanie Mencimer, in her book Blocking the Courthouse Door, called "E Pluribus Screw 'Em." In the interest of gaining some perspective, follow me below the fold where I will pose questions and try not to rant, in hopes of facilitating some conversation about how these events are related to civil justice and what progressives can do, besides lament, about it all.

In the marketplace, complicit government agencies and their accompanying under-regulated industries allow dangerous drugs, toys, and food to endanger our health because it saves them money. And on the hill, lobbyists successfully protect big industries by weakening people’s ability to file lawsuits and obtain adequate compensation for abusive corporate practices like spying on us illegally, profiting off of predatory loans, and paying women and minorities less than they deserve. What do these distinct events have to do with one another? Whether it's preventing ordinary Americans from filing lawsuits at all (FISA), or reducing victims' compensation after they win a lawsuit (Exxon), the corporate lobby and the politicians they court are hard at work rigging the legal system to protect big business.

Unsurprisingly, mainstream media is being, to put it mildly, inconsistent in its coverage of these events. Last Sunday's New York Times article on the civil justice debate, for instance, read like an op-ed written by a Chamber of Commerce lobbyist rather than serious journalism--it practically praised big business industries for their work. (Read responses to this article on TortDeform)

Frustrating as that may be, that means that right now is a pivotal moment for progressives and progressive media. That everything is happening in an election year, where Obama and McCain and those running for public office on the local and state levels are being asked to take strong positions, means that we have an opportunity to oranize and strategize about how to leverage our influence on the political debate and set a progressive political agenda to protect Americans' legal rights.

Let's take Obama’s new stance in support (gasp!!!--not really though) of the FISA compromise. This is a signal of the work progressives have to do as agitators of the candidates, even those who some believe are most likely to work for a progressive agenda once elected. This campaign season provides us with an opportunity to gauge just how hard we will have to work to achieve an agenda of fairness for ordinary Americans, and accountability for corporations. It also forces us to ask each other exactly what this agenda looks like. One aspect of the agenda, which has yet to be articulated on a widespread level, is to protect Americans' legal rights and access to the courts. This is essential.

Each iteration of the corporate lobby's attack on our rights provides a new opportunity to exert pressure on the candidates to take a position so as to enrich our understanding of the substance of each candidate's politics. It also serves as practice for the serious mobilizing and organizing we have to do after the election cycle--and the honeymoon--is over.

Kia Franklin: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 4:26 PM, Jun 26, 2008 in Civil Justice | Corporate Accountability | Election 2008 | Progressive Agenda
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (3)


Comments

This post feels somewhat unfocused. Are you writing about one issue or group of issues?

I'm guessing that the unstated thread is that 12 years of right-wing GOP control of Congress, eight years of G.W. Bush as president have moved a lot of our government's policies way over to the right.

Is it a surprise when Mr. Bush's Supreme Court limits Exxon's punitive damages or protects the right of millionaire candidates to outspend those with less money? We been in the wilderness too damn long.

Posted by: Daniel Millstone | June 26, 2008 06:45 PM

Daniel--

All the various issues discussed, but particularly these 2 recent events, fall under a larger theme: a business friendly legal/political climate in which ordinary Americans' legal rights get the short shrift. We see it in bad court decisions, dangerous legislation, inadequate government regulation--we see it throughout our government and in our legal system.

I agree w/ you--I do think this is the result of a deliberate right wing corporate agenda. But it's been going on much much longer than 12 years. For at least 30 years, some say almost 4 decades, dating back to the infamous Powell Memo, the corporate lobby has been working to influence public opinion, media coverage, and legislation governing corporate power.

As for the bad Supreme Court decisions, no, I'm not so much surprised as now exhasperated. We've seen a steady rollback on our rights through the courts for years now. You just see a few good decisions and think they're a glimmer of hope.

Thanks for your comments.

Posted by: Kia | June 27, 2008 10:14 AM

Excellent post. The "immunity" vote on FISA -- shielding corporations for civil liability for potentially-illegal acts -- is a straight-up test of whether congresspeople are willing to put corporate profits over civil rights. The answer so far is depressing indeed.

Posted by: jon | June 27, 2008 02:26 PM


Post a comment

Verification: