This is a fascinating bit of analysis published by Matt Stoller at Dylan Ratigan's site.
Its main point is about the role of oil in controlling U.S. policy, both in obvious and unobvious ways. He tells the story of a meeting he was in with then Rep. Alan Grayson and the OPEC governor for Saudi Arabia. Then he notes (my emphasis):
One embassy official told me that the nickname people use for the country is the “Federal Reserve of Oil”. This is because, like the Fed which controls the marginal supply of the critical resource known as dollars, the Saudis control the marginal supply of that critical resource known as oil. As such, many people come to Saudis asking for them to fund their projects, off-book. Think Charlie Wilson’s War, when the Saudis bought weapons for the Taliban to fight the Soviets more than 25 years ago, at the behest of an American Congressman.Stoller focuses broadly on the system that holds this in place, the system that the Occupy Movement seems to be opposing:
We saw this during the financial crisis, when the Federal Reserve essentially financed trillions of dollars of bailouts in collaboration with the executive branch. The Fed took a quasi-fiscal role, leading former central bankers like Willem Buiter to basically say, paraphrased, that these actions were flat-out unconstitutional. It is Congress that appropriates money, not the executive branch. But there are many routes to funding off-books operations. The CIA and the national security state are largely shielded from Congressional overview. ... This is the system we are trying to fight. It is a system guarded by PR, by rivers of political money, and by profound policy biases in favor of our reliance on oil.That analysis is well worth your attention.
My goal, however, is more narrow. I wish to serve up, not a meal, but one small nut, something to take home and ponder.
How much of our government is funded off-book? Ponder that.
On-book (i.e., Congressional) funding is amenable to quasi-democratic control. But when all the money in the world flows to billionaires of various stripes — to the very-big bankers, to CEOs like Jack Welsh, to energy and manufacturing trogs like the Kochs and the Coors — and then passes out to finance government-style foreign and domestic projects, political control passes out as well, from People to Money.
And that off-books financing of government is not just project-based (Stoller's examples include Charlie Wilson's War and the Fed's TARP bailout). It happens at the front-end as well, in the purchase of politicians who then act as proxies for the wishes of Money. (Sorry, did I say "purchase"? Silly of me. I meant "contribute in a citizenly way to the electoral campaigns of".)
How much of our government is funded off-book? Some? Half? Most?
Even if the answer is only "some" — that's enough (and frankly, given the "off-book" sales of Congressional votes, I'm in the at-least-half crowd). The great goal of our recent redistribution of wealth not for the rich just to have it. After all, how many fur coats can you sweat into in a lifetime? How many mistresses can you inadequately enjoy?
No, the goal of Big Money is Big Power. How much of our government is financed off-book? The part you will never control.
P.S. For readers of Kevin Phillips American Theocracy, there's a note about China in Stoller's article that Phillips would say, guarantees China's future for the next century.
GP
