Crony capitalism is a concept with which the typical informed American voter is now familiar. We are very proud of our contribution to this awakening and it is gratifying to see candidates of all stripes having to defend their current crony arrangements with donors, past crony deals, or alternatively to see them go on the attack against cronyism. That Cruz won the Iowa Caucuses despite an explicitly anti-ethanol subsidy stance is no small feat.
Bernie Sanders and Carly Fiorina have made fighting crony capitalism a key part of their campaigns. (In very different ways.) Of course, Rand has railed against crony capitalism as the chief advocate of classical liberalism in the race. Even Jeb Bush tried to make a case that he was an anti-crony candidate at one point.
Hilary Clinton has lost ground because of her perceived crony connections. Trump’s image is tarnished by his perceived embrace of crony dealing.
Being associated with crony capitalism has real consequences for candidates, Republican, Democrat, and other. This is new. The politicians are being called out for their relationships with powerful interests and that is a very good thing for the American people.
Here’s to making the pols squirm.
Norquist, for one, says a candidate’s record isn’t as important as what he or she is promising, given the seismic shift the party has undergone on the issue of cronyism and pork. What’s most notable to him is that, with the exception of a few “leftover commitments” (Rubio’s sugar subsidies, he says, are one), “nobody out there is going, ‘No, no—corporate welfare is a good idea.’ The rules changed, and they changed for everybody.”
That’s right. The rules have changed.
ACC is a completely non-partisan organization. We do not support/endorse or oppose any candidate for office. We believe that both major parties are heavily influenced by special interests and will report on crony capitalism wherever and whenever we see it.