Corruption and the Problem of Donations

Tom Cook should be investigated for bribery.

Now, I am not saying that an investigation would turn up bribery, especially given how the Supreme Court has tried to legislate bribery into none existence from the bench. But twice in Trump’s terms, Apple products or material Apple depends upon, have been exempted from tariffs after discussions with Trump and twice Trump has been gifted items from Tim Cook — once a high end computer, once a gold-plated knick-knack. Are those bribes or payoffs? Maybe, maybe not. But they are certainly suspicious enough that they warrant investigation. That no such investigation is going to happen, even if the Dems take the White House in 2028, is the problem of our age.

The Democratic party, in any sane political environment, would be chomping at the bit to dig into the massive corruption and law breaking in the Trump administration. They would be forcing articles of impeachment in order to put the details in front of the press and the public, and they would be pounding at any firm that does something that is even corruption adjacent. Instead, the leadership of the party quashes and downplays any impeachment resolution that surfaces, puts together an AI working group that contains only boosters of AI, and praises the pardon of one of their on who had been convicted of bribery. Heck, Jeffries own campaign slogan — strong floor, no ceiling — is a literal promise to billionaires to not restrain their wealth and thus their power. They are literally making it impossible for the national party to be associated with anti-corruption and anti-oligarchy.

Why?

Part of it is the popularism disease — the idea, best exemplified by Matt Yglesias and Dvid Shor, that Democrats cannot change minds. All they can do, for example is it ignore immigration and hope that the issue becomes less salient. This is self-evidently stupid. The public can and has been persuaded on plenty of issues. Even on the supposed third-rail of immigration, Democrats highlighting the treatment of Kilmar Abrego Garcia helped drive Trump’s immigration numbers down. This attitude comes partly from the fact that a lot of centrists are uncomfortable with the direction of the party on immigration, trans rights, Gaze, power, economics, etc. By insisting that things cannot change, they have a number-driven reason for not acting as the party base wants them to act. Or, just as importantly, not to have to pick a side in a possibly contentious argument.

It also comes partly from the fact that a lot of moderate Dems think that the people hate partisanship, and so everything must be bipartisan and nothing should be fought too hard. This, too is nonsense. People’s revealed preferences show that they never punish people for partisanship and instead punish people how do not appear to be making things better. And, of course, we just lived through dozens of elections where being anti-trump drove massive, massive swings in voting.

I suspect, though, that a bigger part is money. The Dems take in a lot of money from corporate donations, and those donations cannot but help to have an effect on policy and messaging. More than half of Americans think that billionaires are bad for democracy, more than two thirds want a tax on billionaires, and want the government to force billionaires to use their money for philanthropy. And yet, the Dems do not pledge to not take corporate donations and they do not promise such taxes or regulations. Again, motivations are complicated, and many older and moderate dems still believe in the power of capitalism to lift all boats, despite the last forty years of history. But the donations certainly help strengthen that side of the debate, and the fear of not having enough money to compete drives many politicians. The irony, of course, is that even before Trump, Dems did not need those donations to be competitive.

Whatever the reason, the unwillingness of Dems as a party to embrace anti-oligarchy, anti-corruption politics is a serious problem. First, it is leaving a huge political weapon the ground, often in surprising ways. Affordability is a massive problem in this country, but many of the real solutions are hamstrung by the inability to attack oligarchy. The party that provides affordable housing, free childcare, and free post-secondary education (college or otherwise) is likely going to realign politics for a generation. But those things almost certainly require budgets that in turn require higher taxes on the richest amongst us. Depending on billionaire and corporate donations limits the parry’s ability to impose those taxes and thus solve those problems. Enforcing accountability on, say, AI firms that release chatbots that encourage teens to kill themselves is made more difficult by accepting money from firms and people who do not want to encourage corporate accountability. Political reforms — like a larger House and proportional representation — become harder to pass when the people who benefit from the current system are funding the Dems.

While Trump is a terrible person, he is also, at least somewhat, a symptom of a broken system. We have lost the ability to hold the powerful to account, and we have lost the ability to take large, positive steps to improve people’s lives. Our institutions have largely bent to Trump’s authoritarianism. Defeating Trump is a necessary step toward repairing our country, but it is not sufficient. We need, desperately, reform at almost every level of government and the economy. And if we do not have a party driving that reform, we will soon find ourselves with a meaner, more competent Trump acolyte, ready to finish the authoritarian work of his predecessor.