well i'm tom arbonne in washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture the u.s. supreme court handed another victory to rich guys who like to see more money in our politics breaking down arizona public financing election law yesterday so as the right wing court officially killed publicly financed elections and paved the way for the party rule in america as parliament prepares to vote on an austerity measure that would spin greece into an economic turndown outrage public workers

have started a forty eight hours strike and taking to the streets with a debt default hanging in the balance who's going to win the standoff in the mediterranean people of greece are the banks of the i.m.f. and the republicans argue that the only way to avoid a greek style financial crisis here in america is to slash government spending but new data shows exactly what happens when governments tighten their wallets and let's just say it doesn't lead to economic prosperity. you need to know this another day another this supreme court decision in favor of big money in our politics yesterday in another five to four ruling the right wing of the supreme court struck down an arizona law that provides public financing financing of elections it was intended to level the playing field between people with huge fortunes and rich friends and just average folks running for office by

supply and matching public funds to candidates who are being outspent by private money a lot made sure that electoral politics in arizona wasn't a whoever has the most money wins sort of game the high court ruled that any attempt by the government to equalize. toral opportunities as in making sure both candidates are on a level playing field financially is unconstitutional but what is constitutional to this conservative supreme court out is so pretty and question corporate takeover of our democracy as decided last year in the citizens united case makes that point so how does this really make sense isn't fewer and not more corrupt of corporate dollars in our elections a good thing and if the supreme court just kill off public financing of elections here offer his take on the issue is sean parnell president of the center for competitive politics sean welcome thank you for having me tom great to have you here with us why do you hate democracy. i don't i love democracy i also love free

speech simply put the government has no role in deciding how much political speech should be in the campaign process they should not be deciding when a candidate has spoken too much or too little that's up for candidates that's not for their supporters that's for voters that we're not talking about speech or we're talking about money but money enables speech so you're going along with the boston versus actual arguably buckley versus folio decision of the supreme court that money and speech of the same thing i don't think the founders ever would have thought that in jefferson warned about the danger of overblown influence of wealth bateson warned about it hamilton talked about it twice the federalist papers this is this is this is a pretty radical with a fairly modern concept but the supreme court has. no actually it's not i mean buckley viva layo has for thirty five years been the defining case thirty five in terms of the modern well i point i mean this is this is not something that the

founders ever would have a budget well before the four buckley there was not a broad attempt to limit the ability of citizens to contribute to candidates and in causes of well there was no number of them there were they in virtually every state there were laws about about how much money. we spent in elections in nineteen zero seven at the silverback that said corporations can't participate in federal elections or any election at all in any way there were some laws but certainly not to the extent that there was after watergate that really triggered a rush to campaign finance regulations by corruption some of them are in thai corruption some of them are pro incumbent some of them are designed to stifle unwelcome speech but just because the supreme court says something is right or is true doesn't mean it is of the supreme court said dred scott the sure the slaves were property of the supreme court's in one thousand nine hundred nine and that was the case. and where the you know the separate but equal applies here says ferguson

sure the supreme court said a lot of a lot of stupid things so over the years i'm very happy to hear that you're not stuck on precedent a lot of people when citizens united came out were absolutely hysterical over the idea that the supreme court had overturned what turned out to only be a twenty year old precedent so i'm very glad all they were trying to tell me they did not just tell him actually it was not overturned also because the tell because that someone actually held a specific through to it was a campaign that the tillman act concerned campaign contributions to candidates in my point would be i frankly i mean you know if you want to get here in the weeds and just stay there for thirty seconds because people's eyes glaze over sure is i think you know the decision that was it was decided was smart versus madison you know i think the whole concept of judicial review should not exist it's not the constitution that's you know that's that's where me and phyllis schlafly agree and we're just you know but but shouldn't you know let's assume tomorrow the. mccain

feingold was back in place or that that all across the nation states like laws like arizona had like maine had like portland oregon had where if you get enough signatures and if you can prove you know another is improved. you have some basis some sort of support among the populace the federal funds or state funds are used to support your candidacy and and when somebody tries doubts because they happen to be a millionaire or a billionaire or they have buddies who are the state will ante up to level this what would again what possibly could be. because it's not the government's role to try and establish a level playing field as the supreme court has said the idea that the government can try and hold down the speech of some in order to elevate the speech of others is wholly foreign to the first the member of the opposite of that is is. no no no

certainly what you're what you're not seeing is that there is a lot of money in america on all sides of the political spectrum unless you're truly talking some fringe ideas you know restoration of the monarchy and that sort of thing the democrats don't have a problem raising money republicans don't have a problem raising money people who have ideas all across the political spectrum are able to raise money and one of the things that actually limits that his campaign can't but why should i want you to define the thing i mean you know that i know that i like to think like all the other not all of the other but most of the other o.e.c.d. nations so when most of the e.u. nations say money is not speech well because he does speak we have a first amendment and the first thing i'd say money is speech you know it does not but the important thing to remember is that money and mabel's speech if that book that holds true it whether you want to take one hundred dollars that inking it is lots of people to go to support you unable speech getting about your supporters enables are you i think fading yet as the media is enabled speech they all of that

can be done without money actually not very effectively without money to enable you to convey your message or really in a political operatives could be and tobacco advertising that was a certainly be a violation of the first amendment i mean can. it's have a right to sit to distribute their message i really do that it would be it would be a violation of the first amendment let me out what you are arguing for would allow the banning of political ads is ban spending money so how do we or prevent any just have we have just have twenty seconds left how do we prevent this nation from becoming a nation where only the rich or the friends of the rich have political office well we don't have that system system right now and we're not heading in that direction there are candidates all over the country do not have great personal wealth who are running for office who are willing who are eager to few and far between having their friends which will have to leave it there thank you tom thank you for dropping by. the use of this most recent ruling look for even more corporate own

candidates to spring up that means more people who deny global warming more war hawks more shills for wall street billionaires will have more on this radical supreme court might steal the tape. it's time for our daily poll your chance to tell us what you think here's today's question supreme court struck down an arizona law that provides public financing of elections is this the end of any public financing your choices are yes or no. god let us know what you think i will be open till tomorrow morning. a human billboard an australian volleyball player is exploring a unique way to finance her and her partner's bid to make the twenty five summer olympics in london she's selling ad space on her body for ten thousand dollars each clerk kelly is offering a one inch by one inch squares on her left arm to be tattooed with the sponsors

logo for fifty thousand dollars she's willing to tattoo her right shoulder for a sponsor the money earned will be used to join the volleyball world pro true or a necessary first step to make it into the olympics crazy or not you can't fault her for chasing her dream now only if we can get members of congress to tattoo themselves with their corporate sponsors have the feeling republicans wouldn't have any clean skin left. coming up what do you get when you cut government spending republicans say prosperity but i'll tell you the real answer after the break and show you the data that proves republicans are lying to us or from still about. the website needs twenty four seven live streaming news towns what to do about the ongoing financial hardship unlimited free high quality videos for download. and stories you never find on mainstream news. something that is seldom

a need for the political. posting more on our team don't rush to. right it was soon greece a two day strike has shut down the nation's public transportation system and riot police are now clashing with protesters in the streets of athens as the greek

parliament is set to consider eight forty billion dollar austerity package on wednesday the targets working people with spending cuts and tax hikes passing these austerity measures is the last hurdle for greece before they receive a bailout from the i.m.f. and the european union previous spending cuts by the greek government have already pushed unemployment in that nation to above sixteen percent and the public is not taking any very very kindly to even more austerity doctors ambulance drivers public transit workers and air traffic controllers among others have launched a forty eight hours strike in protest of the austerity package being shoved down their throats by bankers at the i.m.f. but is austerity really the right way to. fix greece leaders in europe are worried that a greek default could unleash a financial crisis across the continent but it is running that nation into the ground with forced us thirty measures the best way to avoid fiscal calamity and who has the upper hand in this negotiation anyway the greek government leaders of the

i.m.f. and the e.u. are thousands of greeks in the streets of athens for more on this i'm joined by mark reiss brought copartner of the center for economics and policy research mark plotkin back things great to be here great to have you with us greece's unemployment rate is already at sixteen percent and it seems that at least a good chunk of this is the result of these forced austerity measures if they cut even more government spending lay off even more people unemployment going to go out revenue collection is going to go down. how is this supposed to work well it's it's really not going to work i mean if you want the argument that the european authorities and the i.m.f. would give. they would say that eventually the economy recovers because wages fall enough because of the huge unemployment that the economy becomes more internationally competitive and recovers through an improving trade balance that's the theory yes that's the theory they dumped on us twenty years ago to you know

this this whole well that's a whole other argument that we have seen that played out i mean you're talking about what friedman and and chill a. happened in the many of the former soviet soviet states you know it's more like what they tried in argentina from the one nine hundred ninety eight to two thousand and two and actually that's a good comparison because argentina after suffering through three and a half years of recession trying to do these policies that they're imposing on greece and ireland and portugal and spain they said you know and they did very well the economy shrank sharply but only for one more quarter and then it grew sixty three percent over the next six years and pull the eleven million people out of their own some quick stats you know the stories that we're hearing in the general media that the greeks are lazy in fact they these are o.e.c.d. statistics they work an average of twenty one hundred twenty hours

a year that's six hundred ninety more than a german four hundred sixty seven more than in the u.k. three hundred sixty five more than the o.e.c.d. average greek paid leave is twenty three days the u.k. minimum is twenty eight germany is thirty so it's not that they're lazy it's not that they're taking more time off the average retirement age sixty one point seven there's been a phony number out there that fox news has been promoting but it's a funny number this is higher than germany france italy or the e.u. twenty seven average and greece had a strong economy. the twenty second highest quality of life index in the world two years ago higher than the u.k. germany or france twenty fourth birthday at a g.d.p. in the world productivity was hired as of two years ago than france germany or even the u.s. and twenty percent higher than the u.k. how is it that a country that was working has crashed and and now the the e.u. and the i.m.f. are saying ok here's we're going to do this. well there are problems similar to the

ones of the other the other ones portugal ireland and spain all of them had the same problem in the sense that the world financial crisis and recession is pushed them over the brink in the banks just up yes. that. was the year of that i had contributed to as well because you had a big influx of capital that also went out of those countries and you had bubbles there were result of the to begin to what extent is the greek crisis the result of international banks or even greek banks for that matter playing the same kind of games that we saw the game the banks playing here united states throughout the first decade of the twentieth century twenty first century well you have the same problems everywhere with the financial sector and but i think the main thing is that the recession is what hit them they have a problem too that you know the rich people there don't pay their taxes here which

is a bit out of the seventy eight's or send out a twenty it's a little bit worse there. it's a bigger proportion of their taxes that they're missing than we are and so that's part of it too but mainly it is the result of the world recession but instead of raising taxes on the rich or raising the force of the taxes on the rich increase what they are doing is they are now taxing people who are working at minimum wage that raise the income tax on the poor and the working that's right there's a lot of regressive changes that are part of that is the spirit of it is and actually i mean the reason this situation is so bad in greece is because they've done the opposite of what we did here instead of a fiscal stimulus they laid off ten percent of their government workers and they did the equivalent of an eight hundred billion dollar. reduction in spread in the deficit you know it would be like. eight hundred billion in the united states this

is andrew mellon suffice to herbert hoover that's right it is that kind of a liquid over there and you know you know the markets priced in already eighty five percent chance that they're going to default so everyone knows it is not going to work in and a half a minute here to the what if they were to abandon the you and drop through the euro go back to drachmas that is that where it's going to end up i think it very well might end up like that and it certainly can't you know what the europeans are trying to do with the i.m.f. is trying to do to greece isn't going to work so that is one possibility or indeed mark thanks so much for being here tonight thank you thanks for sharing your expertise and thoughts with us always appreciate it what's happening in greece couldn't happen here think again with america on the edge of defaulting on its debt like greece what are our well makers in congress doing they're working on austerity measures like two trillion dollars in spending cuts on the backs of the middle class that frankly are going to crash our economy just like in greece banks has

ravaged our economy and yet the working class has to clean up the mess and we're already seen at a state level just how harmful austerity measures are on the economy i mean here's the states are basically laboratories of democracy this is pretty straightforward stuff adam hirsch at the center for american progress laid this out since the recession twenty four state here's a real clear contrast that we can look at since the recession recession began in two thousand and seven two thousand and twenty four states have cut government spending on average about sudden have percent on the other hand twenty five states have increased government spending an average of around eleven percent so here's the laboratory let's see what the results are of the states that cut spending or that increase spending excuse me we saw unemployment go down two tenths of a percent that's a good thing if you were unemployed people you saw one point four percent increase in private employment this is the think that increased spending employment goes up and he can. growth goes up a half

a point but in the states that cuts spending that would be the twenty fourth day that is twenty five that increased twenty four states that cut spending you saw a one percent increase in unemployment others unemployment got worse more people are out of work you saw two point one percent decrease in private employment so you know in the in the outside of the governmental area which is relatively secure in the in the private economy or in the major value seen jobs just emerging as a leading and you saw a contraction keep in mind when those states that increased government spending the economy grew by half a point in those twenty five twenty five states that cut government spending there was an average of two point nine percent economic contraction was a drop in economic activity pretty straightforward conclusion the more you cut higher unemployment less economic growth on average a ten percent cut translates if you if government spending there's a simple reason for this by the way i should lay that out before we get back into

the numbers the really simple reason for this is that when government spends money on people you know the government hires people government builds things whatever it may be government spending and stuff and workers pockets were hers then go out into the private economy to go to the local store and local restaurant local movie theater they spend that money and those people then that makes payroll for other people and they buy products and those products then have to be manufactured by somebody and you know in all it's been mutilates the economy very straightforward this is econ want to learn so when states cut their money when they cut the money out of the economy by ten percent cut means that you're going to increase unemployment four tenths of a percent one point six percent ten percent cut is going to mean a one point six percent loss in private employment we've seen this now from the numbers in the states and a ten percent cut in government spending means a one point six percent. economic contraction but the economy actually gets smaller

why because rich people aren't the job creators and people who spend money are the job creators and frankly in order to get this thing going government needs to be spending more money put it in the hands of the people who are the real job creators it's pretty straightforward stuff now at the same time in the in state houses all across the country where republicans are in control they're saying cut cut cut cut and what's happening is their unemployment is getting worse and worse and their economies are getting worse and worse here at the federal level here in washington d.c. republicans down the street in the capitol building are all saying cut cut cut cut and yet we know from these numbers that when you cut cut cut cut what happens an economy gets worse unemployment gets worse and more people are out of work why would the republicans not that in those states or here at the federal level i think senator chuck schumer a couple of days ago pointed out it was certainly is beginning to look and i've been saying for

a long time frankly but i think the rest of the world is figuring it out with the republican plan for two thousand and twelve that mitch mcconnell when he said last year his job was to make president obama one term president republican plan for next year is crash the economy make unemployment worse make lives miserable and then people will say ok let's throw the bomb out throw the president out with throw the democrats out and replace them with the republicans this is the republican strategy destroy the american economy and it's a horrible horrible way to play politics. coming out why has america missed the memo for old in the bankers on wall street accountable for their crimes.

let's not forget that we had an apartheid regime right here and. i think. even one well. whenever the government says to the keep you safe get ready because the longer freedom. you know how sometimes you see a story and the seems so silly you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else and you hear see some other part of it and realize that everything you saw. i'm sorry welcome to the big picture.

welcome back to the big picture i'm so marvin coming up in this half hour the flip flop of u.s. troops from afghanistan to iraq and back to afghanistan again has done little

through advance our goals in the middle east especially with new numbers showing the two year high in iraqi casualties so has our foreign policy turned into a giant blackhole game and bad here of all republicans are waging their own war against financial regulation letting banks tears run amok on wall street so is our nation's unwillingness to police or financial markets yet another tragic example of american exceptionalism. last week as president obama paid for his afghanistan withdrawal plan to the american people and mention the iraq war as well and the progress that's been made in that country take a look. tonight we take comfort in knowing that the tide of war is receding

fewer of our sons and daughters are serving in harm's way we ended our combat mission in iraq with one hundred thousand american troops already out of that country. even as we've ended our combat mission in iraq except no one told the iraqi insurgents that on sunday two u.s. soldiers were killed in an attack in iraq earlier in the month another six u.s. soldiers were killed in that attack and in total this month eleven u.s. soldiers have died fighting in iraq that's the most deaths in a single month in iraq since may of two thousand and nine again this is a war in which combat missions have supposedly ended what's going on here back in two thousand and two we had troops stationed in afghanistan to fight the taliban and find osama bin laden but then we sent those troops to iraq and bush's misguided an illegal war and what happened in afghanistan it exploded so in two thousand and

nine president obama took troops out of iraq and simply into afghanistan and now iraq is exploding so has our foreign policy in the middle east turned into a giant and deadly game of whack a mole how can we sustain this and when do we just cut our losses and clear victory and go home your offer is take is retired u.s. air force colonel cedric leighton a specialist in middle eastern security affairs as well as founder and president of cedric leighton associates colonel leighton welcome tom thank you thanks for having me great to have you with us. if canada had you know if it became public knowledge that barack obama was actually born in kenya and an illegitimate president and canada invaded the united states to throw him out and save us from from a bad president. would do you think that you and i would be out on the streets fighting the canadians. probably because that would be one of those situations where you know we don't want foreign invaders we have never liked foreign invaders

and other people are the same way the iraqis don't like foreigners running their affairs and afghans don't like four hundred one that's where it's going. so yeah so shouldn't we say you know george aiken famously in one thousand nine hundred sixty republican senator from vermont said when a johnson when only fifty two hundred americans have died. oh well short of the fifty six thousand i think it was we know that at that point george taking over for the senate said why don't you just declare victory and go home why don't we well that would have been in vietnam that would have been a great great solution to that problem the only problem with that in this particular situation is what you do with all the other powers that are out there for example let's take a rock let's look at it would rock is doing iraq is a decent pro-democracy and what you have theories you have it which between of course saudi arabia which is a u.s. ally syria and iran and syria and iran are allies which is iran wants into iran you know from.