The role of morals and morality in modern American religious politics

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.” -- ascribed to traditional conservative Republican, Barry Goldwater, probably sometime in the 1960s

A commenter here recently made these comments regarding Catholic church dogma and teaching:

But [the fact that many Catholics who have abortions, affairs, lie, cheat, or steal defy church indoctrination] does not alter what the Church claims: that no one has the moral agency of conscience and every civil authority, including that of elected governments, is --in all matters concerning morals-- subservient to its claimed spiritual authority.

And that means that, in the Church's view, its word constitutes a higher law. And, because of this, it claims also that people have no right to make laws affecting morals without the Church being in agreement ... which means that everyone is ultimately subject to them rather than the civil authority conferred by self-government in a free and democratic society.

That is what Christian Nationalists want by establishing their theocracy over democracy, and that is why the majority SCOTUS has sided with these Christian Nationalists, for they learned as children that God's law (as interpreted by the Church) was above all human laws, including those which protect and preserve the liberty of all in civil society.

That raised an important but obscure to most (~95% ?) point that puzzled me for years until I figured it out ~10 years ago. By injecting morality into an expanded range of political issues, the Christian nationalist (CN) movement was effectively expanding the scope of issues it could demand in the name of God to have veto power over. By doing that, the CN movement was expanding its claim to sacred power over secular government.[1]

Radical right and CN politicians, religious leaders and elites have worked for decades to inject morals into as many political issues as possible. They have done this knowingly and persistently, but at the same time as quietly and opaquely as they could. 

To be clear, consciously injecting morals into political issues is an intentional and knowing effort to expand the scope of religious power in the CN's relentless quest to bury secular government and society and replace them with an aggressive, non-compromising, intolerant, bigoted fundamentalist Christian government and society.

That is what Barry Goldwater was worried about long ago. He directly experienced the attack of religion on secularism and natural social change. He saw its non-compromising aggression and attacks against secular society, civil liberties and government. The CN movement is hell-bent on literally reversing social change and the expanded civil liberties that have come with it and replacing that with a biblical worldview nation where God has the ultimate power in government, commerce and society.

In my opinion, the CN political power movement is fairly close to getting what it wants. Maybe stopping the movement is already impossible or nearly so. The outcomes of the next two elections should shed enough light to draw conclusions about just how close we are to losing our democracy, the rule of law and civil liberties to the rule of God and greedy CN religious elites and groups. 

Questions: 

1. Has Goldwater's fear that the preachers could control the Republican Party come to pass? 

2. What about some Democrats in congress who have to kiss the Pope's ring, e.g., some American Catholic Bishops want to block Biden from receiving communion, which would amount to ex communicating him? 

3. Based on a (true) belief that money equals power in our pay-to-play two-party system, is it time to revoke all tax privileges for all religious groups, or is it too late because the CN movement already has access to so much tax money that it cannot be stopped, in other words, are we already hosed? 

Footnote:

1. One of the triggers that led to my epiphany that injecting morality into politics was a big part of why politics had IMO become so polarized, divisive, socially damaging and incoherent came from the end stages of the fight over Obamacare. My recollection is that in order to pass Obamacare, some Democratic Catholics in congress demanded buy-in by Catholic Bishops. Without the Bishops' consent, Obamacare could not have been passed. What the Bishops demanded and got was guarantees that limited access to abortions and birth control. 

I recall being outraged and bewildered. In the months after that, it slowly dawned that religion was much more powerful and influential in secular government than I understood, and that I believed was legal without loss of tax breaks for the participating religious groups. As far as I know, no church lost its precious tax break privileges, although they should have. Apparently, federal laws that give the generous tax break privileges do not prohibit a demand of consent by Catholic Bishops to pass federal health care laws or probably any other kind of federal, state, county, city or local law. CN uses those tax dollar subsidies help finance relentless attacks on secular society, secular government, civil liberties, truth and democracy itself  In the eyes of the CN movement, as long as morals can be injected, the law is subordinate to God, not the US Constitution or the will of the majority. CN is a tyranny of the minority political movement.

To be clear, tax breaks for direct participation in politics by any bigoted, mendacious religious organization is a privilege, not any constitutional right. Through its control of the Supreme Court, the CN movement is trying to lay a legal foundation to change that and elevate its fat place at the tax trough to a constitutional right by any sleight of hand that will suffice to create a needed fig leaf. 

Government is about more than just abortion, gay marriage

and birth control, but they are a great place to start!!

That's confined just to the Medieval Church?

Didn't know the Church had pay-to-play and campaign contributions back then

Questionable morals, illegitimate children?? Nah, not possible, fake news!

The next Texas Governor?

Allen West?

Matthew McConaughey?

Greg Abbott?

Beto O’Rourke?

Someone else?

https://www.austin360.com/story/news/2021/04/19/matthew-mcconaughey-leads-governor-greg-abbott-new-texas-poll/7277367002/

https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/beto-versus-abbott-in-2022-what-are-the-chances/

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/allen-west-will-challenge-texas-gov-abbott-gop-primary-n1273079

Why Republicans have such a major advantage over Democrats

In full compliance with ethics and financial disclosure rules

There are multiple reasons for fascist Republican Party advantage over the Democrats. One is decades of ruthless, divisive radical right propaganda intended to foment irrational fear, anger, bigotry, distrust and belief in crackpot lies and conspiracies. Another is the electoral college. Another is the moral and ethical rot that has settled into the federal government, especially in the last 5 years or so. Conflicts of interest are now normalized and accepted. Senators and representatives can always fall back on lies and illusions such as defense of their voters’ interests as justification to screw the rest of the country and planet as long as it serves their personal interests, mostly wealth, power and re-election.  

The New York Times writes on a key weakness within the Democratic Party that will most likely neuter Democratic Party efforts to pass meaningful legislation on climate change and probably most anything else. The NYT writes:

Joe Manchin, the powerful West Virginia Democrat who chairs the Senate energy panel and earned half a million dollars last year from coal production, is preparing to remake President Biden’s climate legislation in a way that tosses a lifeline to the fossil fuel industry — despite urgent calls from scientists that countries need to quickly pivot away from coal, gas and oil to avoid a climate catastrophe.

Mr. Manchin has already emerged as the crucial up-or-down vote in a sharply divided Senate when it comes to Mr. Biden’s push to pass a $3.5 trillion budget bill that could reshape the nation’s social welfare network. But Mr. Biden also wants the bill to include an aggressive climate policy that would compel utilities to stop burning fossil fuels and switch to wind, solar or nuclear energy, sources that do not emit the greenhouse gases that are heating the planet.

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Mr. Manchin holds the pen and the gavel of the congressional panel, with the authority to shape Mr. Biden’s ambitions.

But Mr. Manchin is also closely associated with the fossil fuel industry. His beloved West Virginia is second in coal and seventh in natural gas production among the 50 states. In the current election cycle, Mr. Manchin has received more campaign donations from the oil, coal and gas industries than any other senator, according to data compiled by OpenSecrets, a research organization that tracks political spending.

The NYT points out that Manchin directly profits from polluting industries. He owns stock worth $1-5 million in Enersystems Inc., a coal brokerage firm he founded in 1988. Last year, Manchin made $491,949 in dividends from his Enersystems stock. His son, Joseph, took the company over in 2000 after Manchin was elected West Virginia secretary of state. Maybe that was part of why our corrupt ex-president felt comfortable with not divesting himself from his companies. There were precedents out there for him to point to and no meaningful federal laws to eliminate conflicts of interest. What this boils down to is having an ethically compromised fossil fuel corporate owner writing fossil fuels emissions policy. That's a fox in the hen house. 

Manchin's spokesman defends the situation, asserting that “is in full compliance with Senate ethics and financial disclosure rules.”

Yeah, Manchin might be in full compliance with Senate ethics and financial disclosure rules, but if so, so what?

Questions: 

1. On balance, who is more corrupt and morally compromised congressional fascist Republicans or congressional Democrats? 

2. Will Manchin let the Democrats pass climate change laws commensurate with what experts are desperately telling us is needed, or will Manchin’s personal agenda triumph over climate change? 

3. For the most part, what is Manchin’s personal agenda, (a) wealth, power and maybe re-election, (b) protecting jobs in West Virginia, or (c) a roughly equal mix of the two? 

4. Are federal ethics and financial disclosure rules adequate to protect the public interest, or are they mostly a smoke screen that corrupt politicians and bureaucrats can point to as evidence of their honesty and service to the public interest?

Why the tax code favors the rich and powerful: Our pay-to-play two-party political system

Based on 2010 data -- it probably

has gotten worse for the bottom 40%

Context

There is an agreement between congress and the consumer tax preparation industry about simplifying taxes for consumers. The deal is this: Congress agrees to not pass laws simplifying taxes for consumers and in return the consumer tax preparation industry agreed to provide free tax prep services for filers with incomes below a certain level, $70,000 if memory serves. Of course, few consumers are aware of this free service. That is how the industry wants to keep it. To keep consumers in the dark and fed BS, the industry lobbies congress to not spend money advertising the existence of the free service. And finally, when some consumers do try to use the free service, the industry tries to trick them into making various payments. The whole thing is a scam to serve the tax prep industry, not consumers.  

That exemplifies how our two-party pay-to-play system fails to work for consumers doing their taxes, but works great for the industry. It keeps our taxes complicated and revenues flowing to them. It's a win-win for the industry, but a kick in the guts for us plankton, sardines and minnows. 

But us plankton, sardines and minnows is not what this post is about. There is another layer of pay-to-play tax sleaze for the big fish and whales. Feeding the big fish and whales is what this is about.

How Accounting Giants Craft Favorable Tax Rules From Inside Government

Feeding the big fish & whales

NYT: “Audrey Ellis went from PwC to the Treasury Department.

Two years later, she returned to her old firm, which promoted her to partner.”

The New York Times writes: 

Lawyers from top accounting firms do brief stints in the Treasury Department, with the expectation of big raises when they return.

For six years, Audrey Ellis and Adam Feuerstein worked together at PwC, the giant accounting firm, helping the world’s biggest companies avoid taxes.

In mid-2018, one of Mr. Feuerstein’s clients, an influential association of real estate companies, was trying to persuade government officials that its members should qualify for a new federal tax break. Mr. Feuerstein knew just the person to turn to for help. Ms. Ellis had recently joined the Treasury Department, and she was drafting the rules for this very deduction.

That summer, Ms. Ellis met with Mr. Feuerstein and his client’s lobbyists. The next week, the Treasury granted their wish — a decision potentially worth billions of dollars to PwC’s clients.

About a year later, Ms. Ellis returned to PwC, where she was immediately promoted to partner. She and Mr. Feuerstein now work together advising large companies on how to exploit wrinkles in the tax regulations that Ms. Ellis helped write.

Ms. Ellis’s case — detailed in public records and by people with direct knowledge of her work at the Treasury and at PwC — is no outlier.

The largest U.S. accounting firms have perfected a remarkably effective behind-the-scenes system to promote their interests in Washington. Their tax lawyers take senior jobs at the Treasury Department, where they write policies that are frequently favorable to their former corporate clients, often with the expectation that they will soon return to their old employers. The firms welcome them back with loftier titles and higher pay, according to public records reviewed by The New York Times and interviews with current and former government and industry officials.

The NYT goes on to point out that industry veterans working in government have had, an “enormous impact.” They (i) officially approve tax loopholes their former firms use, (ii) give tax breaks to former clients, and (iii) block efforts to rein in tax shelters. Talk about the deep state. There it is, working quietly, but fat and happy. 

The NYT mentions some examples. A former PwC partner in the Trump Treasury Department helped write regulations that allowed large multinational companies to avoid tens of billions of dollars in taxes. After doing his deep state duty for PwC, that partner went back his old job at PwC. Similarly, a senior executive at RSM, a major accounting firm, took a high level job at Treasury, and his office then expanded a tax break in ways that RSM wanted. After his deep state service he returned to work at RSM. See how that works? It is fun and easy. Well, at least for the big fish and whales. 

NYT interviews with some former industry executives viewed these practices as a major part of why tax policy is heavily skewed to favor the wealthy at the expense of most everyone else. NYT found that this is bipartisan. In the last four presidential administrations, there were at least 35 cases of people going from big accounting firms to (i) Treasury’s tax policy offices, (ii) Internal Revenue Service offices, or (iii) the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, followed by a return back to the same firm. The NYT writes: “In at least 16 of those cases, the officials were promoted to partner when they rejoined their old accounting firms. The firms often double the pay of employees upon their return from their government sojourns. Some partners end up earning more than $1 million a year.”

The NYT comments on current politics: “President Biden and congressional Democrats are now seeking to overhaul parts of the tax code that overwhelmingly benefit the richest Americans.”

One can easily see why big fish and whales love Republicans with its deep state operating in obscurity, but hate at least some Democrats. Whether Democrats actually will increase taxes on the rich remains to be seen. My guess, there is about a 35% chance that will happen before the 2022 elections. Industry lobbyists backed by campaign contributions are quietly swarming all over congress to make sure that all proposed tax hikes are blocked as quietly and industry fingerprint-free and politician accountability free as possible. At least some Democrats are susceptible to this kind of pay-to-play pressure (free speech persuasion). It takes only one Democrat in the Senate to side with the big fish and whales for the idea of tax increases on the rich to die and fade away.

Questions: Is there such a thing as a deep state where industry executives work in government for a while to write and/or approve tax breaks their employers want and then return to the private sector to be rewarded with some of the added value their tax breaks protected or created? What is the approximate chance the Dems will actually be able to pas tax hikes on the big fish and whales before the 2022 elections? Which party do the big fish and whales prefer on tax policy, the Dems, the Repubs, or are they seen as about the same?