Between the Lines / By Peter McDermott
In one of the most dramatic moments ever seen during a State of the Union address, Justice Samuel Alito seemed to say "not true" and clearly shook his head in disagreement when President Obama attacked the Citizens United decision the week before (in January 2010), which had overturned a century of campaign finance laws and had, he said, opened the floodgates for money in elections, including from "foreign corporations" and "foreign entities."
Two and a half years on, who is right? Well, just last week, the New York Times in an editorial entitled "What Sheldon Adelson Wants" totted up how much that multi-billionaire had given this year to Republican candidates and their PACs. The answer was $60 million, so far.
"That's $60 million we know of (other huge donations may be secret), and it may be only a down payment. Mr. Adelson has made it clear he will fully exploit the anything-goes world created by the federal courts to donate 'limitless' portion of his $25 billion fortune to defeat the president and as many Democrats as he can take down."
Now, consider that the impact of these huge sums from Republican billionaires is being focused not across the board, but on a relatively small percentage of voters in a small number of swing states.
As to what Adelson wants, the Times said, first of all, he believes that the proposed two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, supported by President Obama and most Israelis, is a stepping-stone to the destruction of the Jewish state.
The editorial offered a second possible motivation: "President Obama has repeatedly proposed ending the deductions and credits that allow corporations like Las Vegas Sands to shelter billions in income overseas, but has been blocked by Republicans.
"Mr. Obama's Justice Department is also investigating whether Mr. Adelson's Macau operations violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, an inquiry that Mr. Adelson undoubtedly hopes will go away in a Romney administration."
The paper continued: "Ninety percent of the earnings of his company, the Las Vegas Sands Corporation, come from hotel and casino properties in Singapore and Macau. (The latter is located, by the way, in China, a socialist country the last time we checked.)"
However, despite that last back-hander, the paper of record did not tease out the implications that relationship. Such as: here is a businessman who is dependent upon being in the good graces of a foreign power (he pays no tax there; the Chinese issue his license and control who can and who can't go to Macau) helping to shape our domestic agenda and swing an election.
A New Yorker profile in 2008 made clear how much Adelson cultivated Chinese officials and boasted of his influence with U.S. officials. Here's an extract from that piece:
"At a groundbreaking ceremony, in March, 2007, Adelson said that many members of Congress criticize China for its human-rights record, but he added that he liked the way the Chinese run their country. 'People seem to be living a good life in China,' he said. 'Look at the incredible progress China has made. How can someone say they're doing the wrong thing?' He added that those who don't approve of the way China is governed need not go to the country. 'I don't think the U.S. should be the policeman of the whole world,' he said."
What Adelson thinks America should or should not do is of particular interest to us given that he is spending unlimited amounts of cash in furtherance of his desire to unseat the nation’s president. Five members of the Supreme Court see such efforts as a case of someone exercising his freedom of speech. Others will find it hard to disagree with former White House chief of staff and current Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's recent declaration that the Citizens United decision was the single worst ever made by a Supreme Court in America's history.
