I moved two months ago and one month ago I sent in a new voter registration form to update my address in Washington, DC.

For the past month, on the DC Board of Elections web site, when I searched for my "voter registration status" I got the following message:Registered Voter
PENDING APPROVAL PER RECEIPT OF SIGNED APPLICATIONOf course, the signed application is what I sent in a month ago.  I called on Friday to see if perhaps the online database just wasn't updated.  The woman told me it was, but they'd gotten a ton of registrations and would be processing them through the weekend.  "Don't worry," she said, "but call back on Monday to make sure."

Today, Monday, is the voter registration deadline for DC.  I just called.  This time, I got a busy signal at the Board of Elections.

Our friends at the Brennan Center put it succinctly in a piece on The Hill's blog today:Wall Street routinely doles out large campaign contributions to members of Congress. In the current election cycle, the financial services sector (which includes insurance and real sector), contributed more money to candidates for Congress, the presidency and political parties than did any other sector, totaling $339.6 million from 2007 through today. Both chambers' banking committees also benefit handsomely. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, PACs and employees of the securities and investment industry are the second largest source of cash for members of the Senate Banking committee. During the 2008 election cycle, these contributors raised $11.7 million for the 21 members of that Committee. Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn) received about $4.3 million since 2003, or half of all contributions to his campaign coffers.

Does campaign cash influence legislation and regulation? When Congress last debated regulation (or rather, de-regulation) of the financial industry in 1999, a study by the Center for Responsive Politics showed that members of Congress who supported the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act received twice as much money from commercial banks, investment banks, and insurance companies as those who opposed the measure. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was the product of many years of lobbying by the financial industry and allowed for the loosening of bank regulations that had been in place since the Great Depression.Gutting regulations that had been in place since the Great Depression, leading to a financial crisis that has us moving closer to a repeat of the Great Depression, all because of a pesky little privately-funded campaign system in which Wall Street used its financial might to keep Congress quiet.

When public attention shifts beyond the bailout to the longer term concern of our economy -- and who makes the decisions and regulations going forward -- we need to make sure we fix our political system so it's not a money game that continues to reward the wealthiest interests at the expense of the rest of us.  Here's how:Just last week, the Fair Elections Now Act, which would establish a system of voluntary public financing for Congressional elections, was introduced with bi-partisan support in the House. Last year, Senators Durbin (D-Ill.) and Specter (R-Pa.) introduced the Senate version of the Fair Elections Now Act, which would create a voluntary public financing system for Senate candidates. With the introduction of its House counterpart this week by Representatives Larson (D-Conn.) and Jones (R-N.C.) (both from Clean Elections states), lawmakers are presented with a bipartisan, bicameral effort to undertake serious and lasting structural reform. Public financing would eliminate the perils of special interest cash by establishing strict spending limits, enabling small donors and greatly increasing the power of ordinary voters to hold Congress accountable.

Joe Torres at Free Press posted a blog yesterday titled "Hate Speech Rises in the Media" which gives some examples of the increase of hate speech in the mainstream media.

ANY hate speech is more than our society should have, but it's especially alarming when it is increasing. So where are the voices to counter the hate speech? Silenced. Not by force. Not by intimidation. But by the media ownership structure.

People of color who are being attacked by talking heads in the media have little capacity to respond or frame the message themselves because they can't get into the media market.

On September 25th Common Cause President Bob Edgar, Ambassador Thomas Graham Jr., CC advisor Joseph Montville and I attended a dinner hosted by the United Nations Office of the World Council of Churches and other religions groups that featured Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  Our involvement was a part of our upcoming public diplomacy visit to Iran to take place later this fall.  The theme of the event was, "Has not one God created us?," and the guest list included representatives from more than 20 world religions as well as other prominent figures such as UN General Assembly President Miguel D'Escoto Brockman and former Norwegian Prime Minister, Rev. Kjell Bondevik.

The event was held at the Grand Hyatt in Manhattan and was not without the controversy one might expect from a visit from the current President of the Islamic Republic of Iran.  Fewer than 100 protestors outside the Hyatt railed against Ahmadinejad and tried to antagonize those of us who were interested in having a dialogue with him (although some press reports suggested the turnout was much higher it wasn't a very big crowd).  The protests were sponsored by the Zionist Organization of America, Concerned Women for America, Arabs for Israel, American Maronite Union among others.  The groups were angry for what they believed was a feting of Ahmadinejad instead of the dialogue that it was.

The sky is falling on Wall Street and now more than ever we need all the information we can detailing the possible impacts for Americans. What are the news stories about the financial bailout telling you? Do we know any real details about proposed legislation? How many and what kinds of experts have been asked about these details? Where are the headlines with possible outcomes for Colorado? All I can find are articles mentioning the bailout, only to have the rest of the article about horse race campaign issues.

We see the same headlines in every newspaper in every town. Where are the guts of the stories?

We need a diverse marketplace of ideas in times like these, not superficial headlines that are sent down to all the local newspapers and TV stations from just a few corporate owners. Look at what several Colorado newspapers are running and notice that all but one are written by the Associated Press, instead of local journalists.

The Denver Post Bailout defeated in House; stocks plunge (Associated Press)
The Rocky Mountain News Stunning defeat in House for economic bailout; stock plunge a record (Associated Press)
Durango Herald Durango businesses feel the crunch (local story)
The Pueblo Chieftain DENIED! - House defeats $700B financial markets bailout (Associated Press)
Daily Camera Stunning defeat for economy bailout; stocks plunge (Associated Press)
The Coloradoan House rejects bailout plan (Associated Press)

Watch it live online!

Today and tomorrow St. John's University School of Law in NYC is hosting a symposium titled MAKING HISTORY: Race, Gender and the Media in the 2008 Elections.

This symposium will investigate the subject of race, gender and the media in the 2008 elections. Many democracies, such as the United Kingdom, Argentina, India, Israel, the Philippines, Pakistan, Liberia and other countries have or have had women heads of state, and other countries, like Peru and Bolivia, have elected presidents who are members of racial minority groups. However, the United States has never elected a woman or a person of color as president and has traditionally discriminated against both women and minority voters and candidates. In 2008, we stand poised  to witness the historic event of a black male or a white woman heading the presidential ballot on behalf of a major political party.

WATCH LIVE
All sessions of the MAKING HISTORY Symposia will be broadcast live via the St. John's University Web site. Viewers are also encouraged to submit questions to panelists for any session.

The LA Times covers the story behind the bailout story today: how the major Wall Street financial institutions spent over $1 billion (that's billion with a 'b') on Washington lobbying and campaign contributions in just the last six years, which not only pushed Congress to treat them with kid gloves--i.e. lax regulation, friendly policies--but is also allowing them to continue pushing for their own best interests in the massive bailout package.

The subheadline says it all: Firms have given lavishly to both parties in Congress. That could help them get the language they want in the bill - as well as block provisions such as homeowner assistance.

That's our political system, rife with corrupting big money, soldiering on to favor the wealthy and powerful industries even in the most dire circumstances.  There's no better example of why public financing of campaigns would go a long way towards putting the power back into the hands of the people and allow lawmakers to serve the public interest, not the financial services industry's interest.

Could this happen again?  Well, we had the S&L crisis twenty years ago, but apparently that lesson wasn't enough to overcome the campaign cash of Wall Street.  Either we change the way we finance our elections in this country or... well, you know the old saying, the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

UPDATE (Wednesday): And for a further analysis, see our report out today, "Ask Yourself Why... They Didn't See This Coming."

OneWeb Day is a celebration. We are celebrating the success and vitality of the internet. Our activities online have transformed from entertainment only activities to those vital for the functioning of our democracy. Join Common Cause in celebrating OneWeb Day!

From the online Rocky Mountain NewsUnlike television, radio, or any other medium we have known, the Web has been built by the people who use it. We all share the Internet, and should share in shaping its future. Yet many of us take the Web for granted, assuming it will always be a place where the next "big idea" can thrive. Similarly, far too many who want Internet access cannot get it, shutting them out of modern society and depriving us all of their creativity. To bring attention to these threats and challenges, activists, academics and entrepreneurs around the globe are celebrating OneWebDay today. Akin to an Earth Day for the Web, the theme of this third annual OneWebDay focuses on the impact the Web has on participatory democracy.

Karl Rove, long time senior advisor to George W. Bush, is speaking later today at a Sacramento forum.  He maintains a high profile presence on Fox News Channel as a commentator.  Sometimes, he even takes questions.

Yet Rove refuses to answer a congressional subpoena or answer questions under oath about his role in the firing of U.S. Attorneys and the politicization of the Department of Justice, despite a recent court ruling that dismissed the premise of his claim to "absolute immunity."

It's absurd both that Rove continues to thumb his nose at Congress with no legal grounding whatsoever and that Congress has yet to fully assert its authority, as a coequal branch of government, by compelling Rove to testify.  We've called for a full vote of contempt by the House, we've called for inherent contempt, but the bottom line is: if Congress wants to learn how the Department of Justice was turned into a political weapon for the White House, if it wants to restore the core values of our democracy, if it wants to join us in Recapturing the Flag, Congress. Must. Do. Something.

We know that some folks want to see it happen -- they want accountability -- but with a week before Congress leaves town for the season, will enough of them step up?