Special Interests: Talking or Swearing?

#9, February 24, 1999

"Special Interests." There's a phrase that gets a lot of ink, usually in describing some selfish, if not sinister political force. "He's in bed with the special interests." "She's a puppet for the special interests."

But not all special interests are created equal. I'll make the distinction between two kinds: money interests and idea interests. Idea interests cover a wide range of topics and viewpoints. The abortion issue is a good example. People who politic this issue are powered by their beliefs, not by the profit motive. There’s no significant industry that depends on the outcome.

Money interests are different. While people get into businesses for a wide range of reasons, they have one common need: to earn money. Nothing wrong with that. But sometimes the need to keep making money, whether it’s a subsistence paycheck or a seven-figure capital gain, overshadows any other interest they had in the job. With so much invested in that line of work, they can become dependent on it, and try to prolong it, even when facing evidence that the work is “wrong livelihood” (i.e. bad for people and the earth.)

First, they have to keep convincing themselves it’s okay. Workers can wear ethical blinders, and focus on the process, not the product. A cartoon from the mid-1980’s hit this dead on. People working on a nuclear weapons assembly line are touting the benefits of their jobs: technical challenge, good working conditions, high salaries. "If there is a downside,” says one worker, “we don't see it.” Just to her left, at the end of the line, a child is tottering under the weight of a completed warhead.

Owners, whose interests are more vested, may need more cynical tactics. They can hire consultants who will tell them what they want to hear (e.g. that Russian River gravel mining is really gravel “skimming” which improves water quality.)

That brings us to government. While these owners could convert their businesses to sustainable work (e.g. those weapons workers could be retrained to build renewable energy technology), it’s more profitable to partner with legislators to prolong the life of their terminally ill business plan. When a company or industry invests in representation that increases its revenues (e.g. through fat government contracts) or reduces its costs by reducing regulations, it can cycle a fraction of its profits back into their source, through more campaign contributions and lobbying,

Money interests have a profound effect on public policy. The financial and information environment created by donations and lobbyists make it hard for elected officials to not support “them that have.” When I worked for a US Senator, his secretary kept a list of “major donors” who always got to talk directly with the boss. They came armed with expensive studies that justified the favors they sought. It was hard to argue with them.

At the State and Federal levels, the biggest problem today is “soft money” contributions to campaigns. Locally, the problem is “hidden” contributions, in the form of anonymous “hit pieces” targeting environmentalist candidates, or donations made after the final pre-election reporting date. This latter technique is very popular with local developer interests. Supervisor Kerns, who recently suggested these last minute contributions are not deliberately timed to hide their source, is mistaken.

Environmental and consumer organizations are a direct response to the unhealthy partnership between exploitation businesses and government. They use grassroots organizing to match the financial muscle of the money interests. At the federal level, these groups are supporting comprehensive Campaign Finance Reform legislation to attack the soft money problem. For details on this, check the League of Women Voters CFR website, www.lwv.org/cfrhome.html.

In Sonoma County, the most effective of the idea organizations is Sonoma County Conservation Action (www.sonic.net/~sccanet.) Because they are successful at giving political power to the idea of a healthy environment and sustainable economy, they are regularly and unjustly attacked by organizations that seem to regard SCCA primarily as red ink near their bottom line.

When the charges and countercharges about “special interests” begin to overwhelm, wary voters should look at what could be revving the rhetoric. They should weigh the words of Bob Dylan: “money doesn’t talk, it swears.”