Jeff Danziger notes Elizabeth Warren's recent questioning of Treasury officials, in which she asked when enough is enough.
In case you missed it, the big quote was “If you’re caught with an ounce of cocaine, the chances are good you're going to go to jail. If it happens repeatedly, you may go to jail for the rest of your life. But, evidently, if you launder nearly a billion dollars for drug cartels and violate our international sanctions, your company pays a fine and you go home and sleep in your own bed at night, every single individual associated with this. And I think that's fundamentally wrong.”
Here's her portion of the March 7 hearing:
Couple of small points:
1. It's not cool that Googling "Incidentally, if you launder nearly a billion dollars in drug money, your company pays a fine and you go home and sleep in your own bed at night," turns up 80 hits, including a couple of major sources. That's how Politico quotes her. It's not what she said.
Yes, it's close. But the topic is not "horseshoes."
The verbatim quote, "Evidently, if you launder nearly a billion dollars for drug cartels and violate our international sanctions, your company pays a fine and you go home and sleep in your own bed at night," gets 580 hits, so it's not a lost cause, but, come on, man.
The first step in going after someone for not doing their jobs is to do yours.
If it were only the drug laundering, the fine was about twice the amount involved in that, so you could argue that there's some semblence of justice there.
I wouldn't necessarily agree, but let's have everything on the table. And, given the partisan nature of most of these postings, it's worth pointing out that Warren's hand is strengthened if you quote her accurately.
2. These aren't the droids she's looking for.
She's questioning the system, and that's appropriate, but it wasn't hard for these particular cogs to dodge the inquiry because, as they tell her, the decision on what to do occurs higher up. "It's not my job" is a valid response, as is, "We gave them the maximum penalties we are permitted to."
On the other hand, it's disheartening that "I was only following orders" seems to be slipping back into vogue. I kind of thought, between the Nuremburg Trials at the end of the war, and the trial of Adolf Eichmann 15 years later, that that line of defense had been stained beyond usefulness.
But here's the thing: To bring it forward to the Watergate era, she wasn't looking for the John Dean who would blow the lid off the corruption, just the crest-fallen, disillusioned Gordon Strachan, who was asked the same sort of softball "whaddayathink" question during those hearings:
"Going back to your original concepts of public service and the motivations which moved you in this direction, and subsequently your soldierly obedience to instructions from your superiors and your falling into the Watergate pit," Senator Joseph Montoya (D-NM) asked him, "what advice do you have for ... young people?”
Strachan famously responded, “Well, it may sound — it may not be the type of advice that you could look back and want to give — but my advice would be to stay away.”
Of course, Strachan's switch from obedient servant to chastened philosopher was likely catalyzed by the 15-year stretch he was facing for obstruction of justice and lying to a grand jury. That would tend to sharpen one's focus a bit.
But, in any case, Warren asked them what they thought and the answer was "We don't think."
That's not good. Her pushing them to establish that point certainly was.
The larger point:
I'm glad Elizabeth Warren is in the Senate, because she asks good questions and helps focus on real issues. She doesn't accept that it has to be "that way" and she questions the underpinnings of the system that seem to have driven it off course.
As does Bernie Sanders. As does Al Franken.
But how many gadflies does it take before their stings make the horse do more than wince?
It's obvious that someone from my generation -- the group airily dismissed as "Baby Boomers" who, yes, it's true, have nothing on our resume except serving time as foot soldiers in the Civil Rights Movement, then leading our own movements to stop a war, drive one or two presidents from office, lower the voting age to 18, launch the modern feminist movement and help create the farm workers' union -- it's obvious that we would be disappointed in people who whine about "They're all the same!" and do nothing about it.
Equally frustrating, however, is watching energy wasted by swinging for the fences on every pitch, putting up "ideal" (but nearly always unelectable) candidates for the marquee national offices, while generally failing to contest more winnable, grassroots-level city and county offices.
Warren and Franken had charisma, but you can't count on that.
Sanders, by contrast, not only toes a harder line, but became a Senator by being one helluva good Congressman for several terms, before which he was an extremely popular mayor of Burlington for several terms.
That's the more practical route for building power rather than just gaining YouTube hits, and it's the better example for would-be revolutionaries.
It involves shoe leather, and lots of it.
It involves pamphleting and door-knocking and getting people to the polls and working the phone banks, simply to get the right person into that first office, at the local level. And doing it over and over again until you have captured the city council, and the county board, and have made a mark in the state legislature so that you've gained the popular support and political backing to go for those more glorious, prominent seats.
Because it's great to have an Elizabeth Warren making these inspiring remarks. She's one in a million.
But, in the Senate, she's one in a hundred, and that provides more glitter than traction.
"How do you eat an elephant?" the joke goes.
And the answer is, "One bite at a time."
And the laugh comes from how useless that practical advice is: One person alone can't eat an entire elephant, however she goes about it.
Or a donkey. And certainly not both.
Comments