election spending and two thousand and twelve is on pace to brazen break that record with even more special interest spending and guess who's taking as much corporate money as they can mitt romney in fact ten percent of all of america's billionaires have donated to the romney campaign and the bulk of romney's tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions has come straight from banks toure's and special interest on wall street one thousand nine hundred ninety four mitt romney would have to say to twenty eleven. this very question is why does money have such a cross of influence in our political system and how do we get rid of it one person knows a thing or two about the connection between money and politics as former lobbyist in washington insider jack abrams off his new memoir is called capital punishment and joins me now jack welcome thanks but your book up here behind is it's it's quite a read so money in politics is bad you know how do we get rid of it well we have to ban it basically it's the only way to get rid of what you do that the supreme court says you can't do that well in north carolina they've banned money from lobbyists

to the legislature there and it's the fourth circuit of appeals and hopefully it will work its way up i think the fact that what i propose in the book is that those who are lobbyists or those who are trying to get things from the government the clients of the lobbyist let's call them should be barred from giving any money or any gift for gratuity and i think that's a voluntary act nobody's forcing them to lobby the government no one's forcing them to take things from the government and if they want to do that let them give up the right to give money to our political system what do you do when somebody doesn't lobby and doesn't register as a lobbyist shows up and gives a speech and offers a little advice takes one point three million dollars calls themselves a historian of things one point six million to one for you you know we're talking about here that he's insisting he didn't lobby and yet he made one point six million and fannie may have for apparently learned something. how do you how do you deal with that i don't you're talking about tens of history lesson i mean if you're talking about people who like yourself will just straight up say i'm a lobby so yeah yeah but in there well it is

a lot of the problem in washington people serve in the congress and they come out and they're embarrassed to call themselves a lobbyist maybe they should be embarrassed so instead they dissemble and they create other titles you could advise or and things like that isn't isn't that there are regulations on lobbyist right over exactly when they go up when they go up to lobby on capitol hill they have to register if they do a certain amount of of lobbying but the fact is and someone said it very well that i went out and bought an alfa romeo car but i didn't register at the. i mean it's not a car of course it's a car right you've said rather famously that you had over one hundred members of congress in your pocket. as i recall only you and one other and one of those members of congress bob ney went to jail. how many members of congress do you figure the average lobbyist on k. street has in their pocket well the average big lobbying firm has the least a hundred that they have significant influence with and those by us that was the people we had significant influence we have probably touches with through over three hundred of them and the average five hundred twenty five thirty five didn't

have the kind of the senate and any lobbying firm that's a major lobbying firm is going to have at least that and the minor burns are probably going to have half bad. ralph reed was in a secret partnership with you to screw the indians. and he went to scotland with you and bob ney and some of the others why did john mccain avoid calling ralph reed before congress when he was calling others to testify and why didn't ralph reed go to jail i mean isn't this an example of what can mccain and others still living in fear of big money and the big money that ralph reed to this day still represents well let me let me just hit the comment the setup a little bit we didn't screw the emmys were working for the indians think it was a boat they got out they got screwed not not those not that those tribes i mean but they what was embarrassed about was the fact he was taking trouble money gambling money to beat other gambling tribes while he while he was using his christianity to preach against gambling right and and i think that mccain was the rumor was he was

going to call route to the hearing but we never got anything definitive rob was investigated by the way as were frankly two thousand people in my case very thoroughly i think if they would have found something illegal rap did then they probably would have died in the issues not though tom as we've talked before the issue isn't what's illegal the shoes what's legal the exactly what he should be you know exactly exactly and. again you you you put over a million bucks in the pockets of tom de lay's chief of staff ed buckham what was the result of that write the or actually an organization five months before that they had you know again the impact we put five six seven million in the pockets of the republicans who are five six million whatever was in the pocket of the democrats this is a bipartisan problem everybody is involved in this unfortunately even those who don't think they're involved are involved you put in a few million into these politicians pockets your clients page you that few million plus other millions because you guys are making pretty good to the clients to let me put the money in but you know i would consider that as well but i mean you were still tainted libertarian as the action the but the bigger picture here is that

that was millions what your clients got out of it was billions right quarter your book yes. it seems to me like in america right now you know rather than starting a company to make shoes or t.v.'s or widgets or hamburgers the most profitable business is buying politicians there's no question about it the expansion of the federal state has enabled us basically to see all these lobbyist buying buying businesses buying this thing at the state level as well are you sure absolutely whenever you have power invest in the hands of folks who frankly are willing to exist in a corrupt system you're going to have this problem and until we remove money from the people who are doing this and their ability to play in this system we're going to see it at every level right so. you said you're hopeful that this case that's going to that's before the fourth circuit is going to get a supreme court the supreme court has already ruled citizens united and before that in first national bank for his bloody before that buckley versus fully own and i mean you know the lineage of this. what and nobody in congress seems to have

the whatever other than you know bernie sanders and ted have come out with a constitutional amendment but nobody's given that any serious chance at least so far what i think it's going to take it's going to take it like a citizen uprising oh there's no question about it i think that nature might that well two thousand and ten showed a bunch of guys thrown out i think that the more people focus on this whether frankly the left and right this is not a left and right issue this is the right and wrong issue that people who are involved the tea party movement people involved not by movement which unfortunately hasn't really manifested itself as a political movement in terms of being able to make itself meaningful in this regard but i think that the more people who are even in movements get angry get informed and get out there and vote these guys out and put in members who are willing to get rid of these on their own perquisites and their own royal standing as members of the holy body by congress that they don't have to do what they wake up every morning knowing if they don't raise twenty thousand bucks a day that are going to get real whacked right we've we've got the only way to end that is to end this the special interest money in the system at that point you're

going to i'm going to elections well i mean you know i hear the call for public funding elections i think there are problems with that because i think it opens up another. avenue of potential corruption because frankly i know playing a lobbyist so the minute that that happens they're going to go in there and try to get that money somehow manipulated ok jack a fascinating conversation thank you. it's the good the bad of the very very score beautifully. the good congressman barney frank you like seeing conservative commentators get their one chatted to them as they do so often on the show and you would have loved to have seen what barney frank did to george will yes van a.b.c.'s this week. you can hear they want to tell people remind us look you know that we really know nothing about big

government who can have sex with who can i marry what can i read what can i you guys on the whole not all of you but the conservative one who went through a very. he's right and now republicans who want big government analyze the body fluids of poor people receiving unemployment benefits so put aside the talking points aren't publicans really the party of big government kudos to barney frank for calling them out the bad bill o'reilly. favorite talking had weighed in on the ron paul presidential candidacy this morning on an interview with n.b.c. paul is the only anti-war candidate among democrats and republicans which according to bill o'reilly just this qualifies him for being president. ron paul. his foreign policy disqualifies him in my eyes as an american. look there are a lot of reasons why paul should be president but his views on our nation's war machine is perhaps the one reason why he should be president but o'reilly and other

neo cons over g.o.p. t.v. know that war is profitable so let's keep building those tanks and missiles and let's keep invading as many foreign countries as we can assume that every president since reagan is starting the new war it sadly appears that being a warmonger is a requisite for the white house. and the very very ugly rush limbaugh so guess who live in balls is picking on no try children living in poverty that's right on his radio show last week limbaugh went after kids who are too poor to afford school lunches by saying the free school lunch programs condition children to not feed themselves. but. mr limbaugh these children simply are not equipped to feed them to a little more time is the only compassionate thing we do yet will make that possible you mr new cars driving by trying to make people helpless. one little wage. dependent on the state. which is less should just let poor kids starve at school following get those freeloading second graders to take

or some responsibility for themselves and we could all just get rich in america right. this guy is one of the most high profile conservatives in the country and is using his soapbox to bash more children so expect republicans in congress to listen to their overlord and propose cutting away school lunch programs a.s.a.p. it's a very very. coming up in size daily take no the world is not coming to an end but i do agree with newt gingrich again. drives the world the fear mongering used by politicians who makes decisions to break through it's already been made who can you trust no one who is you in view with a global missionary see where we had a state controlled capitalism is called sasha's when nobody dares to

ask we do our t. question more. so sometimes you know it you know and sometimes you know what you don't know and sometimes as firesign theater says everything you know is wrong and i don't think you know what you want your right. to make. sure. you go what is wrong. if you think saying happy holidays and putting up

a holiday tree or holiday decorations is just the way of the world are these politically correct times that everything you know about the traditions of christmas is wrong christmas the day that christians celebrate the birth of christ has been a federal holiday in the us since the mid one nine hundred century in the celebration of christmas the self goes back more than sixteen hundred years to when the romans began celebrating the birth of christ on december twenty fifth and that is one reason many people find the rebranding of christmas traditions as the holiday season offensive my guest tonight says the efforts by both the government and secular groups to disassociate the traditions of christmas from the holiday and the removal of traditional religious symbols and the real meaning from any religious holiday is counterproductive especially in a country that values and protects religious expression as much as the united states still vision new d.v.d. series buck denver asks why do we call it christmas aims to educate people of all ages about the traditions of christmas well use christmas what we.

will it would be a presence why. it's really wants with who we have own. how do meet since clearly she's a. big deal when a judge should create no dream he. could chris. to. fill this year as an actor animator director writer and puppet tear his animated christian children's series veggie tales has sold more than fifty million copies on d.v.d. as buck denver asks what's in the bible d.v.d. was named the best selling new children's d.v.d. series in the christian market in two thousand and ten he's also the two thousand and ten recipient of the mom's choice award. welcome to the program. but back says hi to phil i'm so that's right phil vischer. presently she says promoting your

appearance attacked rhode island governor lincoln chafee for calling the state's christmas tree a holiday tree given that there are people in rhode island whose taxes paid for that tree who are not christians and that the tree was originally a pagan symbol that predates jesus it was originally lit to bring back the sun on the shortest day of the year is the right in our era tax bizarre. well i mean first of all i have no problem with someone saying i'm a i'm a conservative christian i have no problem with saying happy holidays to me because they don't know i could be jewish i could be muslim you know that they don't know what my beliefs are and i think that's actually respectful i think it's actually christian to put someone else first having said that the christmas tree decorating a evergreen in the month of december in america has never been anything other than a christmas tree you know you have to go back to about the seventh century to see when an evergreen decorated meant anything but a connection with with jesus wept at the time of st st boniface the english

missionary that one if you want to go back to the origins of the thing as you well know for the better part of six thousand years in europe it was you know the at that as the days got shorter and shorter period people got more and more paranoid and the priests whether they were druids in england or or you know weird celts in germany they go up on the top of the tallest mountain and find the biggest tree and set that sucker on fire on the night of the shortest day because they're pretty good astronomers and you know the next day the day would be a little bit longer and everybody go war we did it again the priest are going to be in charge for another year and you know that's been going on for a long time what you know if you want to call it a christmas let's call it a year old tree let's which is what the holiday was called before jesus yeah but that was never an american tradition it was never really an english tradition so our heritage once we've got the germans they were reporting those things in england for thousands of years before jesus was even born you have to go back you know you have to go back about fifteen hundred years to get back to that point eight an evergreen decorated in north america has never been anything other than

a christmas tree and when when you no one has ever decorated an evergreen in a state house in north america and dedicated it to the god odin so what we're doing is kind of you they should make i think would be interesting to see if someone could get reelected having done that yeah it's a go to for years and probably even do you think do you think feel that it's wrong to make money from christmas. joy i think it's wrong to make money from christmas i didn't know most would be up with that with that kind of drives well he would have been confused with the celebration of his own birth i mean in that in that day and age the early church did not celebrate birthdays so that was kind of a new concept right from the beginning i don't think it's wrong to make money from christmas i just don't think you know if i don't celebrate hanukkah i don't think i should put a menorah in my front yard and then say it's not a menorah it's a hanukkah or it's a it's a holiday candleholder because i just don't think we should be rewriting other people's christian religious traditions holiday traditions i don't think it's something that we should get into but here's the thing that confuses me is that you

know other than a wild misinterpretation i think of the of the purple of the talents throughout the new testament jesus repeatedly preached and lived a life of absolute poverty and you know to the point of you know from you know going after the money changers in the temple to you know the parable of the metaphor of a rich man and camels you know camels going through the eyes of needles and everything else and yet i find people like yourself the millionaires who are on fox news and sean hannity bill o'reilly these guys talking about the war on christmas and all these folks who are like making money on crime on jesus basically on the guy who said that you have to choose between god and mammon and it seems like you've chosen mammon are you concerned that you're going to go to hell for this. no what we're trying to do is educate kids i mean we create educational products and because they cost money to make parents buy them because so do you do

do live like jesus of poverty. he did not take a vow of poverty there are people that did that but he was not one of them what anyone besides his clothing. very little but he didn't take it that the notion of a vow of poverty didn't come around until the monastic age so that's a few hundred years later ok you get mike you get my point though i mean you're you're you're doing pretty good with this thing isn't something to fundamentally wrong with making money arguing in favor of a religion that is and particularly the arguing for the sanctity and non exploit exploitation for the purposes of making money of a holiday that's all about a guy who didn't make money. you know it depends on what your motive is i think if your motive if you're if you're a televangelist in your motive is to make money you're obviously out to lunch you're obviously you've wandered off the ranch it's very hard to support your position if you are a pastor who's leading a church and you have to raise money at the end of the year to pay the bills and

keep the lights on that's a whole different thing and then what we're trying to do and what most christian ministries that i know are trying to do is raise enough money to keep doing the work that god has called them to do which i think is a whole different thing i mean at the end of the day n.p.r. has to raise money to keep talking about the good stuff they do it doesn't mean that they're not that they're not doing it they're. ok good point phil phil vischer thanks a lot for being with us and you're welcome thanks for having me for more information on any of phil's d.v.d. series check out. what's in the bible dot com and veggie tales dot com and now everything you know about christmas is right almost. the ironic thing about the new gay marriage presidential campaign is that he

catapulted of the top of the field thanks to crazy talk and fear mongering and he's now plummeting in the polls for saying the one rational thing he said so far during the whole campaign. in last week's republican debate newt went after the judiciary saying this. i would just like jefferson jackson lincoln and f.d.r. i would be prepared to take on the judiciary if i'm trying to did not restrict it so from what it was doing i agree he's talking about the supreme court not really newt's right we need a president to take on the supreme court that has grown way too powerful here we have on the supreme court nine an elected officials who serve for life and have the sole power to strike down or create new laws in america that power does not exist in the constitution they took that power way back in one thousand nine hundred three in a case of marbury vs madison when chief justice john marshall claimed the right of judicial review which allows the high court to strike down laws passed by congress

and signed by the president in other words give the supreme court supremacy over the other two co-equal branches of government the legislative and the executive the idea of an all power powerful judiciary is also in direct contrast to how alexander hamilton imagined the judiciary when he wrote the federalist papers number seventy eight the judiciary from the nature of its functions will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the constitution because it will be released in a capacity to annoy or injure them the executive not only dispenses the honors but holds the sword of the community the legislation the legislature not only commands the purse but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated the judiciary on the contrary has no influence over him of the sore or the purse no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society and can take no active resolution whatsoever it proves incontestably that

the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power that it can never attack with success either of the other two. yet the judiciary has done exactly that the supreme court has gone beyond its constitutional power every single time it struck down a law passed by congress and signed by the president and most importantly every single time it created out of whole cloth new legal doctrines like separate but equal equal in plessy versus ferguson or corporations or people with citizens united and yet oddly no politician is talking about this direct threat to our government of an all powerful judiciary no one except newt that it is. our judges of both of the rest of the constitution or judges one of the three co-equal branches i knew i was launching a topic that no other presidential candidate modern times has launched and i knew it had to be intellectually defend that's why i'm so thomas jefferson even agrees

with newt horrified by the judiciary's power grab jefferson wrote in an eight hundred twenty letter to mr jarvis who thought supreme court justices should have the power to strike down laws you seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions of very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy the constitution has erected no such single tribunals i know of no a safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves so the question is what do we do about a two powerful judiciary well new proposal something radical arresting judges. one of the things you say is that if you don't like what a court has done that congress should subpoena the judge and brain him before congress him and hold a congressional hearing some people say that's unconstitutional but i'll let that go for a minute i just want to ask you promote practical standpoint how would you do in

force that would use in the capitol police now to arrest him if you had to or you have or you'd instruct the. justice department to send the u.s. marshal a listing here and who goes a little over the top his promise is still right we don't need to be sunny u.s. marshals after federal judges why because as alexander hamilton pointed out we can just ignore them just as president enter jackson did in one thousand in suit in eight hundred thirty two when he disagreed with john marshall's decision on the supreme court that the state of georgia couldn't seize indian lands jackson just ignored the court saying perhaps apocryphally john marshall has made his decision to let him and force the point is the supreme court can't enforce any of its decisions the executive branch controls the military and the police not the judiciary so if the president just decided to ignore the high court not a damn thing the judges could do about it not only that according article three section two of the constitution the supreme court actually the legislative branch

has the power to regulate the supreme court it reads the supreme court chill have appellate jurisdiction both as to law and fact with such exceptions and under such regulations as congress shall make period end of sentence no where in the constitution can you find the power given to the supreme court to strike down laws or to create a whole quasi bizarre legislative doctrines like the idea of corporate personhood no where and not only that the supreme court has to operate under such regulations as congress shall make at least according to the constitution. so the point is newt gingrich's campaign will likely flame out in fact it's already flame you know but let's not let his message about the too powerful judiciary flame out as well because the nine kings on the high court many of whom have ties to the federalist society and are in the pockets of corporate power are the biggest threat to our

democracy today the last president who tried to use article three section two of the constitution which gives congress the explicit power to regulate the supreme court was franklin d. roosevelt he failed probably because he gave up before it fully engage the fight and because the war in europe was becoming a major distraction it is time to revisit the concepts of judicial review and judicial supremacy as stanford law school's dean larry kramer notes in his book the people themselves and it's time to reconfigure our government back to the way jefferson and ended it with the people being the only safe depository of the ultimate powers of our society and no matter how imperfect the messenger may be and in this case newt is a pretty damn imperfect messenger it's time for americans to have a serious discussion about the supreme court and the very very average behavior they've been exhibiting since two thousand when they gave the presidency to george w. bush and twenty ten when they unleashed in visual invisible money on our political

processes check out move to amend for good starting point. as the big picture for tonight for more information on the stories we've covered visit our website at thom hartmann dot com and free speech dot org and our team dot com also check out our two you tube channels there are links at thom hartmann dot com this entire show is also available for free video podcast and i tunes and we have a free thom hartmann i phone and i pad app in the app store you can send us feedback on twitter at tom underscore our on facebook at tom underscore our many other blogs message boards and telephone comment line at tom our dot com and don't forget democracy begins with you you participate when you show up get out there and get active tag your it occupies something we'll see you next week suitable.

for. mission free couldn't take should free school or church is free arrangement free. three stooges free. and free broadcast clothing videos for your media projects a free media. tom. for the. science technology innovation hall the list of militants from around russia we've got the future covered.

cope spate of finding any more survivors from russia's oil rig disaster with dozens still missing two days after the drilling platform sank in the icy waters. signs of fracture within the syrian opposition while some welcomed the government's decision to let observer risk into the country either slammed the move and call for an air of military intervention and. we're going to be the transformative moment for example in economic justice in america despite critics warning the end to corporate protests would not last until the winter police have ahead of this three months on the occupy movement is still gaining.