What I can't seem to make anyone understand, is in a mixed economy, where the government is given vast powers over the private business sector, this flow of money from businesses to legislators is a given. The system itself demands it. Any so-called "campaign reform" will be worthless, as the money will find another direction to flow.

A large business MUST maintain a Washington presence or risk its own destruction. This is a known fact. For every crooked CEO who is using political contributions to obtain special favors, or destroy a competitor, there are twenty who are simply paying "protection money" to defend themselves against such tactics. When I was with Rotary Rocket, we were just getting to the size where this was becoming important. Dealing with NASA was also an issue. The message from Washington was friendly, but basically broke down into: "Play the game. We wouldn't want to see any...accidents happen."

Bill Gates, who runs one of the most powerful corporations on Earth, used to spend almost nothing on political contributions. The government, cheerfully prodded by Gates' competitors (heavy contributors), hauled him before a court and showed him that they could destroy one of the world's most powerful corporations at a whim, and that there were no basic principles left in our nation to protect him.

"The dissident scientist was to be humiliated; authority was to be shown large not only in action but in intention. Galileo was to retract; and he was shown the instruments of torture as if they were to be used."



- Jacob Bronowski, describing the trial of Galileo



So Gates, who is probably almost singlehandedly responsible for a large chunk of our economic prosperity, was taught a lesson. Current Microsoft contributions are in the many millions. Gates is learning to play the game. He has LOTS of money, and some politicians now enjoying Gates' money may eventually regret waking this sleeping giant.

Anyone who thinks antitrust has one damn thing to do with controlling monopolies on behalf of the customers is hopelessly naive. The Gates fiasco was not instigated by customers, but by bitter competitors who refused to believe their own mistakes may have something to do with their situation. Every correction in the Microsoft case recommended by the government would have raised prices and crippled operating software, which seems like an odd thing to do on behalf of customers.

The antitrust trial was about one thing: taking a potential competitor in the fields of economic and political power and showing him who had the guns. The fact that Gates has about as much political ambition as my dog was not perceptible to those in government, who by their nature see power games everywhere they look.

The power of our government to regulate and control the private sector has no perceptible limits. Any Constitutional limits were surpassed, if not utterly annihilated, decades ago. If the government passed a law requiring all businesses to paint their buildings fire-engine red, it might be defeated with pressure brought to bear on legislators, but with a few minor exceptions, not one single person would question the fundamental right of the government to make such a law.

That most people don't even SEE this is testament to the socialist brainwashing that has pervaded our society. In the 1800s, if someone had come to a farmer and told him that Washington D.C. was going to pass a law telling him how long his butter churn handles had to be, he would have been thrown in a manure pile, or sent on his way with a load of rock salt in his ass. Yet tens of thousands of Federal laws just like this are on the books.

Just once, I'd like to see a businessman subpoenaed by the Congress to come up and ask where the hell they found the authority in the Constitution to call up a private citizen as though they were members of the Judicial Branch. And then tell them to fuck off, with a little bit of a reminder about who exactly in this picture is supposed to be the public servant.