Tuesday, August 24, 2004
History Doesn't Repeat Itself--But It Rhymes
Remember how odd it seemed, after Bush was installed in office, when he picked Ford Administration retread Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense? New administrations generally pick their officials from the high councils of previous administrations, but it was seemed weird at the time for Bush to go past his own father and Ronald Reagan into the mists of the 1970s to pick a guy who had been out of public life for 15 years. Of course, Bush had already picked Dick Cheney as his running mate (or had Cheney thrust upon him--remember Cheney was supposedly the head of the committee screening potential running mates before getting the gig himself). Although Cheney served Bush 41 as Secretary of Defense, it wasn't much noted at the time that Cheney's first big gig in Washington was as White House Chief of Staff under--you guessed it--Ford. In 2000 and early 2001, people suspected the Rumsfeld and Cheney choices were made so that it would seem like grownups were in charge at the White House. We know now that giving Junior some chaperones might have been one reason, but it wasn't the only one. The men around Bush have worked steadily to make various longstanding pet projects into reality--whether it's the Project for a New American Century's plans for empire, or the oil industry's plans to maintain its dominance of our energy future.
And here's one other thing Cheney and Rumsfeld have done. Thirty years ago, in the wake of Watergate, the Freedom of Information Act was expanded to open more operations of government to public scrutiny and oversight. According to Reason's Matt Welch, President Ford initially favored the expansion, but was convinced to veto it by two of his senior officials--Cheney and Rumsfeld. Now, a generation later, back in the saddle in Washington, Cheney and Rumsfeld are leading the charge to increase government secrecy. In his article, Welch charts the drive for greater secrecy, which is good for the governors and lousy for the governed. The war on terror gives the Bush Administration a convenient fig leaf behind which to hide its thirst to keep its actions secret--but as has become clear regarding the war on Iraq, they'd have curbed the public's right to know what's done in its name anyhow, even if September 11 had never happened.
So that's one case in which we know we're getting less information than we need for a healthy democracy. Here's a case in which we're getting less information than we need both for a healthy democracy, and for our personal health itself. Despite polls showing broad, bipartisan support for environmental protection, the Bush Administration is working harder than any administration in memory to dismantle those protections. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a litigator with the National Resources Defense Council, says that people ask him why nobody knows about the Bush assault on the environment. "You ought to get the word out," they say. Kennedy says it's nearly impossible, because environmental reporting is nearly nonexistent in the mass American media. Today, Salon has an excerpt from Kennedy's new book, Crimes Against Nature: How George W. Bush and His Corporate Pals Are Plundering the Country and Hijacking Our Democracy, that traces why the environment rarely makes news. For one thing, environment stories aren't sexy, and they don't have the sort of defined beginning, middle, and end that leads to good storytelling. In addition, the demise of the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to present multiple views on issues of public interest, has made balance subject to the whim of corporate owners--who are not likely to run stories critical of potential advertisers. And recently a Florida court case involving two reporters fired for refusing to alter a news story to make it favorable to a large corporation came down on the side of corporate interests. Kennedy says, "This decision effectively declared it legal for networks to lie in news reports to please their advertisers." Not exactly a prescription for the kind of fearless, public-interest reporting that so many young reporters aspired to do in the wake of Watergate.
Secrets and lies. In the end, that's the primary product of the Bush Administration and the corporate oligarchy it serves. Thirty years ago, a secretive liar was driven from office. Today, the race is too close to call.
Remember how odd it seemed, after Bush was installed in office, when he picked Ford Administration retread Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense? New administrations generally pick their officials from the high councils of previous administrations, but it was seemed weird at the time for Bush to go past his own father and Ronald Reagan into the mists of the 1970s to pick a guy who had been out of public life for 15 years. Of course, Bush had already picked Dick Cheney as his running mate (or had Cheney thrust upon him--remember Cheney was supposedly the head of the committee screening potential running mates before getting the gig himself). Although Cheney served Bush 41 as Secretary of Defense, it wasn't much noted at the time that Cheney's first big gig in Washington was as White House Chief of Staff under--you guessed it--Ford. In 2000 and early 2001, people suspected the Rumsfeld and Cheney choices were made so that it would seem like grownups were in charge at the White House. We know now that giving Junior some chaperones might have been one reason, but it wasn't the only one. The men around Bush have worked steadily to make various longstanding pet projects into reality--whether it's the Project for a New American Century's plans for empire, or the oil industry's plans to maintain its dominance of our energy future.
And here's one other thing Cheney and Rumsfeld have done. Thirty years ago, in the wake of Watergate, the Freedom of Information Act was expanded to open more operations of government to public scrutiny and oversight. According to Reason's Matt Welch, President Ford initially favored the expansion, but was convinced to veto it by two of his senior officials--Cheney and Rumsfeld. Now, a generation later, back in the saddle in Washington, Cheney and Rumsfeld are leading the charge to increase government secrecy. In his article, Welch charts the drive for greater secrecy, which is good for the governors and lousy for the governed. The war on terror gives the Bush Administration a convenient fig leaf behind which to hide its thirst to keep its actions secret--but as has become clear regarding the war on Iraq, they'd have curbed the public's right to know what's done in its name anyhow, even if September 11 had never happened.
So that's one case in which we know we're getting less information than we need for a healthy democracy. Here's a case in which we're getting less information than we need both for a healthy democracy, and for our personal health itself. Despite polls showing broad, bipartisan support for environmental protection, the Bush Administration is working harder than any administration in memory to dismantle those protections. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a litigator with the National Resources Defense Council, says that people ask him why nobody knows about the Bush assault on the environment. "You ought to get the word out," they say. Kennedy says it's nearly impossible, because environmental reporting is nearly nonexistent in the mass American media. Today, Salon has an excerpt from Kennedy's new book, Crimes Against Nature: How George W. Bush and His Corporate Pals Are Plundering the Country and Hijacking Our Democracy, that traces why the environment rarely makes news. For one thing, environment stories aren't sexy, and they don't have the sort of defined beginning, middle, and end that leads to good storytelling. In addition, the demise of the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to present multiple views on issues of public interest, has made balance subject to the whim of corporate owners--who are not likely to run stories critical of potential advertisers. And recently a Florida court case involving two reporters fired for refusing to alter a news story to make it favorable to a large corporation came down on the side of corporate interests. Kennedy says, "This decision effectively declared it legal for networks to lie in news reports to please their advertisers." Not exactly a prescription for the kind of fearless, public-interest reporting that so many young reporters aspired to do in the wake of Watergate.
Secrets and lies. In the end, that's the primary product of the Bush Administration and the corporate oligarchy it serves. Thirty years ago, a secretive liar was driven from office. Today, the race is too close to call.
