by Michael Karath ‧ RELEASE DATE: May 21, 2019
A well-researched, solidly argued case for limiting political spending and donations that’s slightly hampered by its...
Awards & Accolades
Our Verdict
GET IT
A writer calls for a constitutional amendment to end the influence of money in American politics.
In this book, Karath (Overthrowing the Invisible Empire, 2017) looks not to the 2010 Citizens United case as the root of the problems with money in 21st-century politics but to the Supreme Court’s 1976 decision in Buckley v. Valeo as the key factor in allowing unfettered involvement in elections by corporations and wealthy individuals. The author recounts a deeply researched history of recent debates over free speech and campaign finance reform and draws clear connections between political donations and beneficial treatment. The volume discusses a number of scandals and problems that can be linked to the influence of political donations, including Jack Abramoff’s lobbying, the vast power of David and Charles Koch, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and Meg Whitman’s candidacy for governor of California. After presenting a wealth of evidence, Karath then goes on to argue that political spending must be limited as well as contributions, and he presents a draft of a constitutional amendment that might ameliorate the situation. He also guides readers through the process of amending the Constitution. The backmatter includes a collection of statements from notable figures on the role of money in politics as well as a detailed list of source notes that include well-regarded experts in the field. Karath is a thoughtful writer and has done the research necessary to support his wide-ranging contentions. The arguments are generally persuasive, although readers will be left with the sense that advocates of campaign finance reform are generally outmatched by their opponents’ deep pockets. And while the author maintains his optimism toward the book’s goal of removing the influence of money, more cynical readers may find the proposed remedies unlikely to succeed. This is a work of advocacy, clear in the position taken in its pages. While major conservative donors like the Koch brothers (David Koch died recently) and “hedge-fund billionaire Robert Mercer and his daughter Rebekah Mercer” receive pointed attention, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers and leaders are equally indicted as participants in and beneficiaries of the profit-driven aspects of politics. At times, the prose becomes too caught up in its own eloquence, delivering verbal thrusts or an excessive series of rhetorical questions (“Would the Kochs and other corporate titans, who spend billions of dollars manipulating government and politicians for profit, suddenly abide by the honor system? Would they voluntarily stay out of the public arena, leaving billions of dollars in potential profits on the table?”). But the bulk of Karath’s writing is strong, biting, and evocative, as in this passage about Filip Palda, a French Canadian economist, libertarian author, and disciple of Austrian economist Friedrich A. Hayek: “Leave it to a French-Canadian writer relying on arcane studies by an Austrian economist to explain American democracy to Americans.” This is not a book that will leave the audience feeling good about the state of politics in the United States. But readers will undoubtedly finish the work better informed about the nature of the problem and quite possibly will become motivated to join the author in pushing for fundamental changes to the political system.
A well-researched, solidly argued case for limiting political spending and donations that’s slightly hampered by its overambitious constitutional goal.Pub Date: May 21, 2019
ISBN: 978-0-578-47079-5
Page Count: 398
Publisher: Thaddaeus Books
Review Posted Online: Oct. 21, 2019
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Jan. 1, 2020
Review Program: Kirkus Indie
Share your opinion of this book
by Charlayne Hunter-Gault ‧ RELEASE DATE: Nov. 1, 1992
From the national correspondent for PBS's MacNeil-Lehrer Newshour: a moving memoir of her youth in the Deep South and her role in desegregating the Univ. of Georgia. The eldest daughter of an army chaplain, Hunter-Gault was born in what she calls the ``first of many places that I would call `my place' ''—the small village of Due West, tucked away in a remote little corner of South Carolina. While her father served in Korea, Hunter-Gault and her mother moved first to Covington, Georgia, and then to Atlanta. In ``L.A.'' (lovely Atlanta), surrounded by her loving family and a close-knit black community, the author enjoyed a happy childhood participating in activities at church and at school, where her intellectual and leadership abilities soon were noticed by both faculty and peers. In high school, Hunter-Gault found herself studying the ``comic-strip character Brenda Starr as I might have studied a journalism textbook, had there been one.'' Determined to be a journalist, she applied to several colleges—all outside of Georgia, for ``to discourage the possibility that a black student would even think of applying to one of those white schools, the state provided money for black students'' to study out of state. Accepted at Michigan's Wayne State, the author was encouraged by local civil-rights leaders to apply, along with another classmate, to the Univ. of Georgia as well. Her application became a test of changing racial attitudes, as well as of the growing strength of the civil-rights movement in the South, and Gault became a national figure as she braved an onslaught of hostilities and harassment to become the first black woman to attend the university. A remarkably generous, fair-minded account of overcoming some of the biggest, and most intractable, obstacles ever deployed by southern racists. (Photographs—not seen.)
Pub Date: Nov. 1, 1992
ISBN: 0-374-17563-2
Page Count: 192
Publisher: Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Sept. 1, 1992
Share your opinion of this book
More by Charlayne Hunter-Gault
BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW
by William Strunk & E.B. White ‧ RELEASE DATE: May 15, 1972
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis...
Privately published by Strunk of Cornell in 1918 and revised by his student E. B. White in 1959, that "little book" is back again with more White updatings.
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis (whoops — "A bankrupt expression") a unique guide (which means "without like or equal").Pub Date: May 15, 1972
ISBN: 0205632645
Page Count: 105
Publisher: Macmillan
Review Posted Online: Oct. 28, 2011
Kirkus Reviews Issue: May 1, 1972
Share your opinion of this book
© Copyright 2024 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Hey there, book lover.
We’re glad you found a book that interests you!
We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!
It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!
Already have an account? Log in.
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Welcome Back!
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Don’t fret. We’ll find you.