What Chris Bowers’ proposal of whipping up public anger to make big institutions responsive to the public
is up against is the lure of the sinecure that brings most of congressme to their “profession”.The lobbyists and their financial patrons have got this territory covered and those congressmen who play by the rules of these financial patrons can expect a steady stream of fundsthat would ensure his survival over the long term,which is precisely what attracts them.
This why I think Emmanuel Cleaver’s statement is significant.Even though he was rattled by the emergence of public anger at the AIG misdeeds,he went back to being a coward,in his own words because he wanted a long term sinecure,like all of them.
That explains a lot to me.
