Robert B. Reich's Blog, page 10

Think Grocery Prices Are High Now? Just Wait.Think your grocery...

Think Grocery Prices Are High Now? Just Wait.

Think your grocery bill is high now? Just wait.

A massive corporate merger could send skyrocketing food prices through the stratosphere, unless the government sees the deal for what it is — a rotten egg.

Supermarket giant Kroger is in the process of finalizing a nearly $25 billion deal to acquire its jumbo-sized competitor Albertsons, combining their 5,000 supermarkets into one mega company.

Corporate concentration in the grocery market is already a huge problem, with estimates showing that just five companies control over 60 percent of American grocery sales

This means less consumer choice, and more opportunity for grocery stores to jack up prices — which they’ve already been doing lately under the cover of inflation. Let’s be clear: Big corporations are using the excuse of inflation to pass price increases through to you.

Now you may think this merger won’t affect you because you don’t have a Kroger or Albertsons where you live, but here’s the kicker: Both stores already control dozens of other grocery brands across the country. So you may not even know you’re actually shopping at Kroger or Albertsons.

All told, this deal could affect grocery stores relied on by 85 million households.

What’s to stop this new goliath from continually raising prices if customers have nowhere else to shop? With grocery bills already going through the roof, Kroger buying Albertsons gets rid of the roof altogether.

A Kroger-owned mega company can also get away with paying workers even less than it already does — because fewer competitors means grocery workers have fewer choices of whom to work for.  

According to one survey, 75% of Kroger workers were food insecure and 14% have experienced homelessness. One out of every five Kroger workers has relied on government aid to survive.This is no secret to Kroger execs either. Recently leaked internal documents reveal that the company has known about the plight of its workers for years.

This is the story of monopolization, folks. Corporate consolidation is bad news for everyone except the super-rich. It’s awful for consumers, workers, and the economy as a whole — and it’s driving the most extreme wealth imbalance in over a century.

But the good news is that this Kroger-Albertsons deal is far from being fully baked. The Federal Trade Commission has the power to intervene and stop it. Several labor unions, produce growers, antitrust experts, and state Attorneys General are already urging the FTC to block it.

We can’t afford to let another supermarket giant gobble up an even bigger piece of the American pie.

Debunking “No One Wants To Work Anymore” I keep hearing...

Debunking “No One Wants To Work Anymore” 

I keep hearing “no one wants to work anymore.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, corporate America’s biggest lobbying group, claims there are over 10 million job openings right now in the US for which employers can’t find workers.

Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell says the U.S. is dealing with a “structural labor shortage” that won’t be resolved anytime soon.

But here’s the truth: there is no labor shortage.

There is a shortage of jobs paying sufficient wages to attract workers to fill them.

When a problem is wrongly described, the solutions posed often turn out to be equally wrong.

For most Americans, real inflation-adjusted wages continue to drop. Any pay increases workers may have earned in the past few years have actually been pay cuts, because wages have lagged behind the rising costs of basic necessities — like housing, food, childcare, and healthcare.

You don’t have to be a financial wizard to see why some workers might say the hell with it.

So, what should be done about the difficulty employers are having finding workers?

Simple. If employers want more workers, they should pay them more.

Many corporations are raking it in right now, they can clearly afford to.

Of course Jerome Powell and his colleagues at the Fed don’t want to hear this. They’re aiming to deal with the so-called “labor shortage” by slowing the economy so much that employers can find all the workers they need without raising wages.

But the Fed increasing interest rates to slow the economy will prevent millions of people from getting desperately-needed raises and cause millions more to lose their jobs — disproportionately low-wage workers, women and people of color.

Meanwhile, Republicans and some corporate economists blame the “labor shortage” on overly generous unemployment benefits. They say the way to get more people into jobs is to make their lives outside jobs less tolerable.

Rubbish. Most unemployed people are already hard up.

Pandemic benefits are long over, and even before COVID, America’s unemployment system was already the least generous of any rich nation.

Taken to its logical extreme, the corporate Republican argument holds water only if you don’t give a damn about workers.

Sure…you could eliminate all safety nets and at some point people without jobs will hurt so much they’ll have to take any available job, at any wage, whatever it demands.

But do this, and we’ll end up with an economy that’s even crueler than today’s economy.

Look: If we want more people to take jobs — AND we wish to live in a moral society where people can maintain decent lives — the answer is to pay people more.

Instead of saying “no one wants to work anymore,” we should be saying, “no one wants to be exploited anymore.”

The Biggest Economic Lies We’re ToldIn America, it’s expensive...

The Biggest Economic Lies We’re Told

In America, it’s expensive just to be alive.

And with inflation being driven by price gouging corporations, it’s only getting more expensive for regular Americans who don’t have any more money to spend.

Just look at how Big Oil is raking it in while you pay through the nose at the pump.

That’s on top of the average price of a new non-luxury car — which is now over $44,000. Even accounting for inflation, this is way higher than the average cost when I bought my first car — it’s probably in a museum by now.

Even worse, the median price for a house is now over $440,000. Compare that to 1972, when it was under $200,000.

Work a full-time minimum wage job? You won’t be able to afford rent on a one-bedroom apartment just about anywhere in the U.S.

And when you get back after a long day of work, you’ll likely be met with bills up the wazoo for doctor visits, student loans, and utilities.

So what’s left of a paycheck after basic living expenses? Not much.

You can only reduce spending on food, housing, and other basic necessities so much. Want to try covering the rest of your monthly costs with a credit card? Well now that’s more expensive too, with the Fed continuing to hike interest rates.

All of this comes back to how we measure a successful economy.

What good are more jobs if those jobs barely pay enough to live on?

Over one-third of full time jobs don’t pay enough to cover a basic family budget.

And what good are lots of jobs if they cause so much stress and take up so much time that our lives are miserable?

And don’t tell me a good economy is measured by a roaring stock market if the richest 10 percent of Americans own more than 80 percent of it.

And what good is a large Gross Domestic Product if more and more of the total economy is going to the richest one-tenth of one percent?  

What good is economic growth if the way we grow depends on fossil fuels that cause a climate crisis?

These standard measures – jobs, the stock market, the GDP – don’t show how our economy is really doing, who is doing well, or the quality of our lives.

People who sit at their kitchen tables at night wondering how they’re going to pay the bills don’t say to themselves

“Well, at least corporate profits are at record levels.”

In fact, corporations have record profits and CEOs are paid so much because they’re squeezing more output from workers but paying lower wages. Over the past 40 years, productivity has grown 3.5x as fast as hourly pay.

At the same time, corporations are driving up the costs of everyday items people need.

Because corporations are monopolizing their markets, they don’t have to worry about competitors. A few giant corporations can easily coordinate price hikes and enjoy bigger profits.

Just four firms control 85% of all beef, 66% of all pork, and 54% of all poultry production.

Firms like Tyson have seen their profit margins skyrocket as they jack up prices higher than their costs — forcing consumers who are already stretched thin to pay even more.

It’s not just meat. Weak antitrust enforcement has allowed companies to become powerful enough to raise their prices across the entire food industry.

It’s the same story with household goods. Giant companies like Procter & Gamble blame their price hikes on increased costs – but their profit margins have soared to 25%. Hello?

They care more about their bottom line than your bottom, that’s for sure.

Meanwhile, parents – and even grandparents like me – are STILL struggling to feed their babies because of a national formula shortage. Why? Largely because the three companies who control the entire formula industry would rather pump money into stock buybacks than quality control at their factories.

Traditionally, our economy’s health is measured by the unemployment rate. Job growth. The stock market. Overall economic growth. But these don’t reflect the everyday, “kitchen table economics” that affect our lives the most.

These measures don’t show the real economy.

Instead of looking just at the number of jobs, we need to look at the income earned from those jobs. And not the average income.

People at the top always bring up the average.

If Jeff Bezos walked into a bar with 140 other people, the average wealth of each person would be over a billion dollars.

No, look at the median income – half above, half below.

And make sure it accounts for inflation – real purchasing power.

Over the last few decades, the real median income has barely budged. This isn’t economic success.

It’s economic failure, with a capital F.

And instead of looking at the stock market or the GDP we need to look at who owns what – where the wealth really is.

Over the last forty years, wealth has concentrated more and more at the very top. Look at this;

This is a problem, folks. Because with wealth comes political power.

Forget trickle-down economics. It’s trickle on.

And instead of looking just at economic growth, we also need to look at what that growth is costing us – subtract the costs of the climate crisis, the costs of bad health, the costs of no paid leave, and all the stresses on our lives that economic growth is demanding.

We need to look at the quality of our lives – all our lives. How many of us are adequately housed and clothed and fed. How many of our kids are getting a good education. How many of us live in safety – or in fear.

You want to measure economic success? Go to the kitchen tables of America.

The Dark Side of Sports StadiumsBillionaires have found one more...

The Dark Side of Sports Stadiums

Billionaires have found one more way to funnel our tax dollars into their bank accounts: sports stadiums. And if we don’t play ball, they’ll take our favorite teams away.

Ever notice how there never seems to be enough money to build public infrastructure like mass transit lines and better schools? And yet, when a multi-billion-dollar sports team demands a new stadium, our local governments are happy to oblige.

A good example of this billionaire boondoggle is the host of the 2023 Super Bowl: State Farm Stadium.

That’s where the Arizona Cardinals have played since 2006. It was finally built after billionaire team owner Michael Bidwill and his family spent years hinting that they would move the Cards out of Arizona if the team didn’t get a new stadium. Their blitz eventually worked, with Arizona taxpayers and the city of Glendale paying over two thirds of the $455 million construction tab.

And State Farm Stadium is not unique. It’s part of a well established playbook.

Here’s how stadiums stick the public with the bill.

Step 1: Billionaire buys a sports team.

Just about every NFL franchise owner has a net worth of over a billion dollars — except for the Green Bay Packers, who are publicly owned by half a million cheeseheads.

The same goes for many franchise owners in other sports. Their fortunes don’t just help them buy teams, but also give them clout — which they cash-in when they want to get a great deal on new digs for their team.

Step 2: Billionaire pressures local government.

Since 1990, franchises in major North American sports leagues have intercepted upwards of $30 billion worth of taxpayer funds from state and local governments to build stadiums.  

And the funding itself is just the beginning of these sweetheart deals.

Sports teams often get big property tax breaks and reimbursements on operating expenses, like utilities and security on game days. Most deals also let the owners keep the revenue from naming rights, luxury box seats, and concessions — like the Atlanta Braves’ $150 hamburger.

Even worse, these deals often put taxpayers on the hook for stadium maintenance and repairs.

We taxpayers are essentially paying for the homes of our favorite sports teams, but we don’t really own those homes, we don’t get to rent them out, and we still have to buy expensive tickets to visit them.

Whenever these billionaire owners try to sell us on a shiny new stadium, they claim it will spur economic growth from which we’ll all benefit.  But numerous studies have shown that this is false.

As a University of Chicago economist aptly put it, “If you want to inject money into the local economy, it would be better to drop it from a helicopter than invest it in a new ballpark.”

But what makes sports teams special is they are one of the few realms of collective identity we have left.

Billionaires prey on the love that millions of fans have for their favorite teams.

This brings us to the final step in the playbook: Threaten to move the team.

Obscenely rich owners threaten to — or actually do — rip teams out of their communities if they don’t get the subsidies they demand.

Just look at the Seattle Supersonics. Starbucks’ founder Howard Schultz owned the NBA franchise but failed to secure public funding to build a new stadium. So the coffee magnate sold the team to another wealthy businessman who moved it to Oklahoma.

The most egregious part of how the system currently works is that every dollar we spend building stadiums is a dollar we aren’t using for hospitals or housing or schools.

We are underfunding public necessities in order to funnel money to billionaires for something they could feasibly afford.

So, instead of spending billions on extravagant stadiums, we should be investing taxpayer money in things that improve the lives of everyone — not just the bottom lines of profitable sports teams and their owners.  

Because when it comes to stadium deals, the only winners are billionaires.

The One Thing That Would Make Elections Better For Everyone Are...

The One Thing That Would Make Elections Better For Everyone 

Are you sick of the onslaught of negative political ads that air on your TV every election season?

The fear-mongering. The half-truths.

Believe it or not, there’s a simple reform we can enact to make elections more bearable for voters.

It’s called ranked choice voting, or RCV, and it could change our politics for the better.

When you head to the ballot box under ranked choice voting, instead of voting for just one candidate, you have the option to rank candidates in order of preference: first, second, third and so on.

So if you’re stuck between two preferred candidates for a position, you can spread your preferences out in hopes that one of them wins.

When ballots are counted, if none of the candidates gets an outright majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed to their supporters’ second choice candidate.

This process continues until a candidate receives over 50% of the vote, and is declared the winner.

It’s also good for a whole host of other reasons.

Implementing RCV could have the added benefit of making our elections… well… nicer.

In a ranked choice voting system, candidates are less likely to engage in the kind of mudslinging we see every election season, because they’re not just trying to be a voter’s first choice — they also want to be the second choice of voters who are backing their opponents.

This can motivate anyone running for office to be more inclusive and appeal to a broader range of voters — helping to connect people who don’t always agree on every issue.

RCV also allows us to exercise our right to vote without feeling like we’re compromising our beliefs or simply voting for the “lesser of two evils.” We can vote FOR the candidates we like the most, rather than voting AGAINST the candidates we like the least. RCV could also open the door to voters casting their ballots for more third-party candidates.

Even if your favorite candidate from your preferred party is not favored to win, that person could still be your first-choice — without you feeling like you are giving up your vote entirely. If your candidate doesn’t make it to the final round, your second or third choice could still end up winning in the final tally.  

Ranked choice voting can even change the kinds of people who run for office — for the better. Potential candidates wouldn’t have to avoid running for fear of splitting the vote or “spoiling” a close election — allowing for a potentially more diverse pool of candidates to run.

Look at Alaska, where voters used RCV to elect Mary Peltola to Congress — making her the first Alaskan Native and first woman to represent the state in the U.S. House.

Lastly, ranked choice voting saves everyone — you, me, elections officials — time and money.

There would no longer be runoffs, which can be costly and often have lower turnout — which means election results that are less likely to reflect the will of the public.

There’s a reason why RCV is starting to sweep the nation — it’s currently being used by 13 million voters across the country.

Ranked choice voting makes elections less painful, less expensive, and can help make our government more inclusive and responsive to what people actually want.

Maybe you can organize to make ranked choice voting a reality where you live.

The Republican Party’s Worst NightmareRepublicans have been...

The Republican Party’s Worst Nightmare

Republicans have been trying to crush unions for decades, but American workers are fighting back with a vengeance.

Many GOP leaders wink and nod while talking about “making America great again,” as if the country was more prosperous when they were in charge.

Rubbish.

Yes, there was a time when the American economy worked better for workers than it does now, but not because Republicans played any part in making it that way. And certainly not because of the bigotry, misogyny, and racism they’ve been peddling to pit workers against each other to distract them from how much wealth is being siphoned off to the top.

In fact, Republicans have been waging a relentless war against what had been one of the biggest drivers of prosperity for the working class — labor unions.

Now, it’s important to note that this prosperity wasn’t shared equally with women or people of color, but a big reason much of the workforce was better off decades ago than today is because of the power of labor unions to organize and fight for the rights and dignity of workers.

Republicans have fought labor unions tooth and nail. They’ve enacted deceptively named “right-to-work” laws, which are all about weakening unions rather than giving workers more rights. And they’ve voted against bills allowing workers to form unions with simple up or down majorities at the workplace.  

This is the great irony of the MAGA movement. And it would be funny if it weren’t so tragic. If Republicans really cared about American greatness, they would support unions — one of the major tools at our disposal to actually combat inequality and lift up the working class.

Fortunately — despite Republican efforts — labor unions are on the rise once more. And so are pro-labor Democratic politicians.

These Democrats won big in the 2022 midterms — especially in the rust belt. They captured the governorships of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota, and also Michigan — where they flipped both chambers of the state legislature. The last time Democrats had full control of Michigan’s state government was in the 1980s.

And look at the impressive victory of John Fetterman — the new U.S. senator from Pennsylvania. He defeated a wealthy Republican snake oil salesman and flipped a senate seat, while running on an unabashedly pro-worker platform aiming to increase the federal minimum wage, end corporate price gouging, and make it easier for workers to organize unions at their workplaces.

It wasn’t just pro-worker politicians who won big during the midterms, but worker friendly ballot measures as well — almost universally opposed by Republicans.

Illinois voted to enshrine collective bargaining rights into its constitution, effectively banning right to work laws from ever being passed in the state.

Washington D.C. voted overwhelmingly to eliminate the subminimum wage for tipped workers.

Voters in Nebraska and Nevada chose to increase their state minimum wage.

Forced prison labor was outlawed in Vermont, Alabama, Tennessee, and Oregon.

Republicans, along with their rich and powerful patrons, have always feared that working people would recognize their collective power, both through unions and at the ballot box. So the wealthy are doing everything they can to hold working people down.

But the midterm elections and the resurgent worker power movement should give us hope that a more just and equitable United States will be built with union labor.

It’s not just about making America great — it’s about making America better. Not just a bigger economy but a fairer economy. Not just more wealth for the wealthy, but better and more secure lives for all.

The Truth About Corporate SubsidiesWhy won’t big American...

The Truth About Corporate Subsidies

Why won’t big American corporations do what’s right for America unless the government practically bribes them?

And why is the government so reluctant to regulate them?

Prior to the 1980’s, the U.S. government demanded that corporations act in the public interest.

For example, the Clean Air Act of 1970 stopped companies from polluting our air by regulating them.

Fast forward to 2022, when the biggest piece of legislation aimed at combating the climate crisis allocates billions of dollars in subsidies to clean energy producers.

Notice the difference?

Both are important steps to combating climate change.

But they illustrate the nation’s shift away from regulating businesses to subsidizing them.

It’s a trend that’s characterized every recent administration.

The CHIPS Act –– another major initiative of the Biden administration –– shelled out $52 billion in subsidies to semiconductor firms.

Donald Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed” delivered over $10 billion in subsidies to COVID vaccine manufacturers.

Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act subsidized the health care and pharmaceutical industries.

George W. Bush and Obama bailed out Wall Street following the 2008 economic crash while providing about $80 billion in rescue funds for GM and Chrysler.

And the federal government has been subsidizing big oil and gas companies for decades, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.

Before the Reagan era, it was usually the case that America regulated rather than subsidized big business to ensure the wellbeing of the American public.

The Great Depression and FDR’s Administration created an alphabet soup of regulatory agencies — the SEC, FCC, FHA, and so on — that regulated businesses.

Corporations were required to produce public goods, or avoid public “bads” like a financial meltdown, as conditions for staying in business.

If this regulatory alternative seems far-fetched today, that’s because of how far we’ve come from a regulatory state to a subsidy state.

Today it’s politically difficult, if not impossible, for government to demand that corporations bear the costs of public goods. The government still regulates businesses, of course –– but one of the biggest things it does is subsidize them. Just look at the growth of government subsidies to business over the past half century.

The reason for this shift is corporations now have more political clout than ever before.

Industries that spend the most on lobbying and campaign contributions have often benefited greatly from this shift from regulation to subsidy.

Now, subsidies aren’t inherently bad. Important technological advances have been made because of government funding.

But subsidies are a problem when few, if any, conditions are attached — so there’s no guarantee that benefits reach the American people.

What good is subsidizing the healthcare industry when millions of Americans have medical debt and can’t afford insurance? What good are subsidies for oil companies when they price gouge at the pump and destroy the planet? What good are subsidies for profitable semiconductor manufacturers when they’re global companies with no allegiance to America?

We’re left with a system where costs are socialized, profits are privatized.  

Now, fixing this might seem daunting — but we’re not powerless. Here’s what we can do to make sure our government actually works for the people, not just the powerful.

First, make all subsidies conditional, so that any company getting money from the government must clearly specify what it will be spent on – so we can ensure the funds actually help the public.

Second, ban stock buybacks so companies can’t use the subsidies to pump up their profits and stock prices.

Third, empower regulatory agencies to do the jobs they once did — forcing companies to act in the public interest.

Finally, we need campaign finance reform to get big corporate money out of politics.

Large American corporations shouldn’t need government subsidies to do what’s right for America.

It’s time for our leaders in Washington to get this message, and reverse this disturbing trend.

The Little Secret About Corporate Profits Have you noticed that...

The Little Secret About Corporate Profits 

Have you noticed that when workers get better wages, the media blames them for rising prices, but when corporations rake in record profits, there’s silence?

That’s because corporate profits aren’t tracked nearly as closely as worker wages. And the reason why comes down to power.

Every month we get measurements of prices, jobs, and wages — these are the three economic variables we hear repeatedly because they are released each month like clockwork.

They’re viewed as the core criteria for how the economy is doing, and drive the national economic conversation.

But what’s missing from this conversation?

Corporate profits.

Without a regular monthly report on profits it’s been easy for much of the media and the economic establishment to conveniently ignore them — along with the power that massive corporations wield when it comes to driving up prices.

Now, we do get reports on quarterly earnings from corporations.

But those estimates are guesswork at best because corporations often use every accounting gimmick imaginable to hide their true value and reduce their taxes — like Apple stashing profits overseas and Google depreciating assets like crazy.  

If we measured corporate profits more often and more reliably, Americans might start to get the full picture about what’s driving inflation to historic highs — the power of big corporations to raise their prices higher than their costs are rising.

We could see profit-price inflation — profits pushing up prices — and not pin the blame on so-called wage-price inflation — workers getting raises. Which, by the way, have actually been wage cuts when you account for rising prices.

Instead, the corporate media repeat data about jobs, wages, and prices — analyzing them and framing stories around them. They are used by policymakers at the Federal Reserve and in Congress and the White House.

The conversation drives a continuous cycle: “If prices are up, well it must be because the economy is too hot and workers’ wages are too high! It’s time to raise interest rates to slow the economy, increase unemployment, and reduce wages!”

And corporations prefer it this way! Because their role in driving inflation isn’t even considered. They are given cover to exploit very real supply chain issues — while padding their profit margins.

The less up-to-date and accurate information we have about their profits, the harder it is to respond with policies that will combat their pricing power. Not to mention that they cut major checks for political campaigns, so there’s little incentive on behalf of many politicians to change this.

The way we try to fix the economy — particularly inflation — is skewed in favor of big corporations and against regular workers, because the way we measure the problem disregards the role of corporations.

If we had timely and accurate information about corporate profits, rather than assuming by default that the Fed must hike interest rates to cool the economy by weakening workers’ purchasing power we would weaken corporations’ pricing power — through, for example, a windfall profits tax, selective price controls, and tougher antitrust enforcement.

Ultimately, we must build an economy that values workers at least as much as profits.

Doing this starts with measuring the right things.  

How the Corporate Takeover of American Politics BeganThe...

How the Corporate Takeover of American Politics Began

The corporate takeover of American politics started with a man and a memo you’ve probably never heard of.

In 1971, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce asked Lewis Powell, a corporate attorney who would go on to become a Supreme Court justice, to draft a memo on the state of the country.

Powell’s memo argued that the American economic system was “under broad attack” from consumer, labor, and environmental groups.

In reality, these groups were doing nothing more than enforcing the implicit social contract that had emerged at the end of the Second World War. They wanted to ensure corporations were responsive to all their stakeholders — workers, consumers, and the environment — not just their shareholders.

But Powell and the Chamber saw it differently. In his memo, Powell urged businesses to mobilize for political combat, and stressed that the critical ingredients for success were joint organizing and funding.

The Chamber distributed the memo to leading CEOs, large businesses, and trade associations — hoping to persuade them that Big Business could dominate American politics in ways not seen since the Gilded Age.

It worked.

The Chamber’s call for a business crusade birthed a new corporate-political industry practically overnight. Tens of thousands of corporate lobbyists and political operatives descended on Washington and state capitals across the country.

I should know — I saw it happen with my own eyes.

In 1976, I worked at the Federal Trade Commission. Jimmy Carter had appointed consumer advocates to battle big corporations that for years had been deluding or injuring consumers.

Yet almost everything we initiated at the FTC was met by unexpectedly fierce political resistance from Congress. At one point, when we began examining advertising directed at children, Congress stopped funding the agency altogether, shutting it down for weeks.

I was dumbfounded. What had happened?

In three words, The Powell Memo.

Lobbyists and their allies in Congress, and eventually the Reagan administration, worked to defang agencies like the FTC — and to staff them with officials who would overlook corporate misbehavior.

Their influence led the FTC to stop seriously enforcing antitrust laws — among other things — allowing massive corporations to merge and concentrate their power even further.

Washington was transformed from a sleepy government town into a glittering center of corporate America — replete with elegant office buildings, fancy restaurants, and five-star hotels.

Meanwhile, Justice Lewis Powell used the Court to chip away at restrictions on corporate power in politics. His opinions in the 1970s and 80s laid the foundation for corporations to claim free speech rights in the form of financial contributions to political campaigns.

Put another way — without Lewis Powell, there would probably be no Citizens United — the case that threw out limits on corporate campaign spending as a violation of the “free speech” of corporations.

These actions have transformed our political system. Corporate money supports platoons of lawyers, often outgunning any state or federal attorneys who dare to stand in their way. Lobbying has become a $3.7 billion dollar industry.

Corporations regularly outspend labor unions and public interest groups during election years. And too many politicians in Washington represent the interests of corporations — not their constituents. As a result, corporate taxes have been cut, loopholes widened, and regulations gutted.

Corporate consolidation has also given companies unprecedented market power, allowing them to raise prices on everything from baby formula to gasoline. Their profits have jumped into the stratosphere — the highest in 70 years.

But despite the success of the Powell Memo, Big Business has not yet won. The people are beginning to fight back.

First, antitrust is making a comeback. Both at the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department we’re seeing a new willingness to take on corporate power.

Second, working people are standing up. Across the country workers are unionizing at a faster rate than we’ve seen in decades — including at some of the biggest corporations in the world — and they’re winning.

Third, campaign finance reform is within reach. Millions of Americans are intent on limiting corporate money in politics – and politicians are starting to listen.

All of these tell me that now is our best opportunity in decades to take on corporate power — at the ballot box, in the workplace, and in Washington.

Let’s get it done.

Does Elon Musk Have a Right to Destroy Twitter?You break it, you...

Does Elon Musk Have a Right to Destroy Twitter?

You break it, you own it. That’s what I was told as a child. But for today’s billionaires, it seems like the opposite is true.

“You own it, you can break it” — at least if you’re rich enough. 

Just look at Elon Musk.

He paid a fortune for Twitter and is now busily destroying it — firing half its employees and driving out even more, causing chaos on the platform, making advertisers flee, and threatening bankruptcy.

Or consider Sam Bankman-Fried, who became a billionaire after founding the popular cryptocurrency exchange FTX — until he drove the company into bankruptcy.

Seems FTX was a Ponzi scheme that got out of hand. At least $1 billion in customer funds is reportedly missing.

These billionaires are presumed to be free from responsibility because they own what they’ve had a hand in destroying. So under the rules of capitalism, they have a right to do whatever they want with their money. Right?

Wrong. Millions have come to rely on Twitter as a vital source of information and connection.  Investors put their money — and trust — in FTX. These people aren’t mere collateral damage. They’re bearing a big part of the cost.

“You own it, you can break it” is a careless norm for a complex society.

Do we really think that the super-wealthy should be allowed to control so much wealth and wield so much influence?

Absolutely not. We need stronger laws protecting the rest of us from the recklessness of these so-called “disruptors.”